Re: [whatwg] (X)HTML + SMIL?

I'm sorry you misunderstood my question, that was: has W3C planned any work
about XHTML2 + SMIL
Then I presented two use cases (video and animation).
But there are other use cases, for example something like a web presentation
which includes XHTML content (ie. mostly tables or forms, since all the rest
is achievable by other means).

It was not my intention to discuss about video in SMIL vs video in HTML or
CSS Transitions vs SMIL Animations.

I hope I clarified

Giovanni

PS:
@Bernard Hawkes Lewis
1) Smil 3.0 uses only one namespace. I don't know if Anne was wrong or Smil
2.1 was different.
2) video in smil is not used because it doesn't work (nor it does HTML5
video, unless you get FF3.1 beta, Opera 10 alpha, WebKit nightlies with
explicit configuration)
3) SVG animations are teorethically part of content, but this has no actual
impact (do you expect that a screen reader will describe the animation?)

@Robert O' Callahan
Yes but they have completely different syntaxes. From an author point of
view, integration is not that bad.
Besides, CSS Animation (which is mentioned in CSS CurrentWork and will maybe
be introduced in CSS4) is actually very similar to SMIL Animation (only how
property changes, not why)