Re: XHTML Basic 1.1 and setting input field to numeric mode

Luca Passani wrote:
> Migrating from XHTML 1.X to XHTML 2.0?
>
> what I think you are missing is that XHTML 2.0 does not seem to have a 
> chance in heaven to replace XHTML 1.X/HTML as it is being used today. 
> Way too different.  Whoever builds XHTML 2.0 apps (for whatever 
> reason) will necessarily do it by building them from scratch, and not 
> by migrating existing web apps. So, what's the point in having this 
> petty feature creep in late versions of a completely different standard?
> If you ask me, someone here isn't understanding developers. 
Dude.... we are developers.  These features were added to XHTML Basic 
because the OMA and the XHTML MP people asked us to put them in.  And we 
put them in the way we were asked to.  XHTML Basic has no real purpose 
except to support the XHTML Mobile Profile, as far as I am concerned.

W.r.t. XHTML 2.0 - it is not a big step from 1.1 - except perhaps 
philosophically.  It incorporates the actual definitions of the elements 
and attributes, which is an editorial change.  It also extends the 
language in ways that make it easier to do structured markup should you 
choose to do so.  I imagine it will ultimately deprecate some features 
that run counter to its structured markup goals (e.g. h1).  But I expect 
that in the end everything you can do in XHTML 1.1 or XHTML Basic 1.1 
you will be able to do in XHTML 2.   We're not idiots, and we have a lot 
of content and applications of our own that we want to continue to work 
with minimal effort when the time comes to convert.

The working group loves to get input from the community.  We plan on 
publishing an updated public working draft very soon.  If you have 
comments or concerns, please let us know!

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com

Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2008 14:45:59 UTC