- From: Mike Champion <mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:55:57 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Andrew Watt writes: >"Is XHTML worth persevering with? Well, let's consider the alternatives: 1 - HTML (4.0?): How long will the industry live with its limitations? Not forever. 2 - XML + CSS + some hyperlinking mechanism: Well, that's my preferred scenario, but even if the W3C agreed on a hyperlinking mechanism TODAY, it would be a hard sell to non-geeks. 3 - Flash or "Blackbird.NET" (a hypothetical IE-specific proprietary extension to HTML; I have no idea if it exists in a lab somewhere, but why would a dominant vendor fail to push the browser markup language forward if the W3C drops the ball?) As much as I would like to live in World #2, World #3 seems infinitely more likely IMHO. Nature and marketplaces abhor a vacuum; if the W3C doesn't advance the hypertext markup language standard to meet evolving needs, the marketplace will find something to declare a de facto standard. [off to read the "Flash MX Bible" that I bought the other day, sigh]
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 17:57:29 UTC