David Dorward wrote:
I was under the impression that you'll also be able to write HTML 5
in XHTML syntax (as XHTML 5, obviously different from XHTML 2 which
is a different concept?).
They are still planning this, but the point is that HTML is not dead,
(real) XHTML is still badly supported among user agents, and support
for other namespaces mixed with XHTML (which is the only major benefit
for it on the client side) is even worse.
HTML5 or the XMLised equivalent are... equivalent, and I'd say so much
so that internal publishing needs should override the choice between the
two.
By this I mean consider what the CMS software you prefer, or whatever
your publishing cycles demands.
There are many, many (many) more XML processing and publishing tools
than HTML tools (due to the predictable syntax), and it's easier to
integrate XHTML into publishing flows, but it of course your internal
publishing needs will vary.
.Matthew Cruickshank
http://docvert.org/
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
