The xhtml:onkeypress architecture

Hi Steven,

  Congratulations for getting XHTML Modularization 1.1 to PR so quickly.
Building upon the HTML 4.01 Recommendation that has been unmaintained by
W3C for more than half a decade now, XHTML Modularization teaches most
fascinating ways to use obsolete technologies like XML DTDs to build new
schemas that, while unsuitable for validation, surely serve a purpose.

I'm glad the HTML Working Group, although expired in 2004, managed to
skip the Last Call and Candidate Recommendation steps and I'm glad to
see the Implementation Report, although marked as "XHTML-Print"
Implementation Report and W3C Proposed Recommendation, confirms that
all the major XHTML implementations, Eclipse, oXygen, Sidewinder, and
XFormation, are conforming XHTML implementations.

In addition to enlightened DTD-writing methodologies the document also
teaches an unprecedented way of exporting attributes for use in compound
document environments; I'm excited about the possibilites the xhtml:id,
xhtml:style, and xhtml:onkeypress attributes offer to content authors.

Nevertheless, given that the HTML Working Group's response to my request
to ask the TAG to review this new aspect of XHTML Modularization--"Its
our language and we can do that"--didn't really remove my architectural
concerns, I would appreciate if the HTML Working Group could document
the design principles established by this new feature in a better way
than marking this issue as unresolved in the Group's issue tracker,

  http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/voyager-issues/Modularization-abstractions?page=2
  http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/voyager-issues/Modularization-abstractions?id=8444

In fact, I think documenting rationale for decisions is generally a good
practise, for example, I'm sure the microformat community would like to
know why using multiple resource identifiers in the profile attribute on
the head element is prohibited in XHTML Modularization as noted in

  http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/voyager-issues/Modularization-abstractions?id=8168
  http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/voyager-issues/Modularization-text?id=8161
  http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/voyager-issues/HTML-4.01?id=6383
  ...

Here again I think marking these issues as unresolved is suboptimal
given the maturity level of the document. Your HTML and XForms Working
Group's sincere dedication to the W3C Process is widely recognized as
exceptional in their respective communities; I could imagine that the
Working Group simply didn't get around to update the tracker with the
latest information from the transition call yet; I'm just saying a
separate document that discusses how the community should embrace the
decisions and new principles would be nice.

Thanks again,
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 00:27:49 UTC