Re: [xml-dev] XHTML 2 Working Group won't be renewed?

[Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>]

On 7/7/09 14:15, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dan Brickley writes:
>
>> Although not as high-profile as a REC-track group, there is nothing to
>> stop a group of like-minded W3C members single-handedly chartering an
>> Incubator Group (XG, see http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ ) to try to
>> progress the XHTML efforts. Perhaps - in part - by defining a recovery
>> model for ill-formed XML markup?
>
> The market will decide, but my take on what the XHTML users out there
> like about XHTML _includes_ the strict error checking discipline it
> imposes. . .

(Maybe that's why there aren't enough XHTML users yet?)

Could an XHTML document somehow be considered a tree of sub-documents, 
each of which could parse or fail to parse on its own merits? Or an 
XMLesque datatype that could be cast into real XML using the heuristics 
documented in the HTML5 spec?  There must be some halfway house between 
pure XML-XHTML and the HTML5 monolith...

Web browser makers have no great incentive for throwing content out due 
to small errors. It shouldn't be beyond the abilities of this community 
to come up with a compromise story that allows the best of XML's 
facilities to live with the kind of compromises and hackery typical when 
dealing with ugly Web data.

Dan