Re: HTML 5 and XHTML 2 combined

Wow.  This is a rather interesting discussion!

I've chosen to try avoiding any debates about HTML 5 v.s. XHTML 2.0 as
well as any debates about the combination of the two.  Instead, I've
chosen to pose two simple questions:

- Different multimedia formats, different programming languages and
even different ways to deliver a package were all designed with
different goals in mind, so why is it that HTML 5 and XHTML 2.0 are
unable to coexist?

- HTML 4 and XHTML 1.x are currently used in mostly the same way.  An
author could use HTML 4.01 Frameset with deprecated markup to create a
page that looks the same as a page designed using XHTML 1.1 with CSS,
cross-browser rendering aside.  What might prevent HTML 5 and XHTML
2.0 from serving the same content with different markup, if anything?

It is my opinion that they should be able to coexist peacefully.  Who
said browser vendors COULDN'T or WOULDN'T support both?  Browser
vendors can support whatever specifications they choose.  The only
disadvantage that XHTML 2.0 has is that it relies upon other
specifications like Ruby, XForms, XML Events, etc. while HTML 5 is all
defined at once, which might also be considered a disadvantage itself.
 However, it isn't as if every browser MUST implement all of XHTML
2.0.  After all, text browsers like Lynx wouldn't necessarily need to
implement XML Events when implementing XHTML 2.0, right?  The same can
be said of AUDIO, VIDEO, OBJECT and CANVAS elements for a likewise
implementation of HTML 5.

As for them being able to serve the same content, why couldn't they?
MathML can be used to create the same rendering as LaTeX after all,
and they're vastly different languages!


Received on Thursday, 8 January 2009 22:47:45 UTC