OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:

> Len,
> Yep, that's the one.
> If you persist in trying to connect with Blogstream you *eventually* 
> get a
> page.

If you think that's bad, imagine being on the INSIDE of that connection. 
I'll move that essay to my external wsp soon...my wife says "what's the 
use in being married to a computer expert if he can't make your Internet 
connection reliable?" I have no good answer. Er, that's not true. My 
answer was: "try unplugging the network cable from the machine that's 
serving the blog. That might be the one causing problem."

> One of the things that struck me about the blog ... maybe coloured by the
> question I am asking ... is how little mention XHTML gets from Paul.
> I wonder, if he is still interested in the topic, if he would comment 
> about
> whether he sees XHTML as a key ingredient in this mix or if, possibly, he
> mentions XHTML as much out of habit as anything.

> If Paul sees XHTML as a key ingredient in the mix that might address 
> aspects
> of the question I want to explore.

XHTML could evolve into something exciting and new, but right now, to me 
it looks like a nip and tuck. I'd love to see XHTML 2.0 or 3.0 be 
essentially XHTML+XUL. But I would also be okay if SVG 2.0 is SVG+XUL. 
As long as we get an interface development language into the standard 
browser stack, I will be happy.

If XHTML's developers want to spend their effort on a nip and tuck, who 
am I to complain? Incremental changes can have benefits over the long term.

  Paul Prescod


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS