[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: why distinctions within XHTML?

• From: "Lauren Wood" <lauren@s...>
• To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 11:51:02 -0700

On 2 Sep 99, at 11:05, David Brownell wrote:

> For the record, some of my feedback back in March to the XHTML work
> was that the basics of the modularization stuff should be in the 
> first release, since it's that fundamental.  I'd even support holding
> back a 1.0 release to ensure modularization is covered.

I would agree with this. I think the world needs the modularization 
as soon as possible and the current XHTML 1.0 brouhaha is taking 
time and energy away from that for little gain.


Lauren

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: why distinctions within XHTML?
    • From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Consensus and Community (W3C and xml-dev)
• Next by Date: StarOffice
• Previous by thread: Re: why distinctions within XHTML?
• Next by thread: Re: why distinctions within XHTML?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread