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

RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG

• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 17:08:58 -0800

At 06:12 PM 11/3/99 -0500, Jelks Cabaniss wrote:
>Would it not save everyone a lot of anguish if XHTML 1.0 were just HTML 4.01
>recast as XML 1.0,

That's what it is.

> in other words without mentioning namespaces *at all*, and
>saving the namespace stuff for future versions (if it's proven to be viable)?

Lots of people have good solid practical uses for namespaces.  Anyone who
thinks that HTML can go forward standing alone in glorious isolation and
never being mixed with another tag vocabulary Just Doesn't Get It.

So XHTML needs a namespace, and the HTML WG is the correct group to assign 
it.  Whether they want to do it as part of the XHTML 1.0 spec or simply as
a 3-line W3C recommendation published separately makes little 
difference. -Tim

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 unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG
    • From: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@j...>
  • RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG
• Next by Date: RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG
• Previous by thread: RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG
• Next by thread: RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread