- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 18:11:34 +0200
- To: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Orion Adrian wrote: >You are correct and I mixed them mixed them up. I meant to say XHTML >1.1 (which has no variations like Strict). > > XHTML 1.1 is just an application of XHTML Modularisation. It is relatively easy to add things to it, and create your own version of XHTML which does contain all the transitional stuff. I do not think you should consider XHTML 1.1 as a specification on its own as much as a base for languages using XHTML Modularisation to work on. XHTML 1.1 happens to not include any deprecated material, but all the deprecated material still exists in XHTML Modularisation. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Monday, 4 July 2005 16:11:39 UTC