Re: Polyglot markup and authors

On 28.1.2013 5:43, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:

> Mike: In trying to understand what Henri said about authors, I see that 
> he was afraid that A List Apart would write about polyglot. And clearly 
> many authors read ALA. But I find only 2 references to Appendix C at 
> ALA.[2] Henri seems to forget that it was XHTML 1.0 that spread the 
> message that XHTML syntax is OK in text/html. Hey, W3.org uses XHTML 
> syntax all over - to this day.

Just to add 0.02 to this polyglot discussion. Czech Web developers
magazine published my article about polyglot 1.5 year ago:

http://www.zdrojak.cz/clanky/polyglot-aneb-webovym-koderem-pod-oboji/

The conclusion is simple -- except very narrow use-cases usage of
polyglot doesn't make sense. Follow-up discussion hasn't indicated
disagreement with this conclusion.

Personally I don't have preference whether polyglot should or shouldn't
be REC.

Leif you seem to put a lot of energy to promoting polyglot. I have seen
something similar 10 years ago -- a lot of energy was put into promoting
XHTML -- unfortunately this created many false expectations on the web
developers side. We shouldn't repeat this mistake again with polyglot.

     Jirka

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz      http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep.
------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bringing you XML Prague conference    http://xmlprague.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------