xml-dev - RE: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG

["Don Park" <donpark@docuverse.com>]

>Would it not save everyone a lot of anguish if XHTML 1.0 were 
>just HTML 4.01
>recast as XML 1.0, in other words without mentioning 
>namespaces *at all*, and
>saving the namespace stuff for future versions (if it's proven 
>to be viable)?

I don't see much difference between zero and one (one?:) namespace
and since there is definite need for a namespace (i.e. XSL) to
distinguish (X)HTML tags from others, I prefer one over zero.

I must say, I was surprised by the decision and have now a more
healthy respect for the W3C process although I suspect XML-DEV has
now become an informal part of the process.  At least all the
stress we must go through to exert that reactive influence is
high enough to prevent abuse <g>.

Best,

Don Park    -   mailto:donpark@docuverse.com
Docuverse   -   http://www.docuverse.com


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