- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 10:18:05 +0200
- To: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- CC: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>, www-html@w3.org
Laurens Holst wrote: > > Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> If visual browsers were the only concern, true. But just because you >> can style elements from an "unknown" namespace doesn't make elements >> backwards compatible. That's a myth. > > > Well, there’s aural stylesheets too... And what’s ‘backwards > compatibility’, really... To me, if it works for most cases, that’s > backwards compatible enough, even though it is not strictly spoken > backwards compatible from a semantic point of view. But in that case you > can just tell people to upgrade their UA :), because backwards > compatibility isn’t a formal goal of XHTML 2.0. Seriously, did you miss: # This would only help though if XHTML 2.0 becomes more backwards # compatible. ... in one of my previous e-mails? That was an important paragraph and I believe that is the one you're responding to now, albeit not directly. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Saturday, 4 June 2005 08:17:57 UTC