- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 01:14:39 +0100
- To: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Quoting Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>: > But heh, you’re the one saying it isn’t compatible anyway! :) > More seriously though, in case XHTML2.0 ever would get an > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml namespace browsers could still > ‘understand’ the old attributes. Maybe it’s a good way for the > browsers to distinguish XHTML 1.0 <object> element behavior from > XHTML 2.0 <object> behavior (assuming that it differs). In XHTML 1.0 "type" did not affect the Accept: header. It was merely a hint. > Anyways, I would appreciate it if for once the HTML WG would either > commit to using the XHTML 1.0 namespace (oh, yes please), or just > break totally free from it. Then at least I’d know what we’re > heading for with this, and form an opinion based on that. Because > obviously if you want to stay semi-compatible with XHTML 1.0, there > are other considerations than if you don’t. Agreed. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:14:43 UTC