/ Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: | Norman Walsh wrote: |> But I hope not. I don't really want to have to rev the Atom format |> spec when XHTML 2.0 comes out. With care, I want to just put XHTML 2.0 |> stuff in my xhtml:div elements and let the down-stream appliation work |> it out. | | XHTML 2 does have a different namespace.
Ouch. I had forgotten or failed to notice that.
Sigh. I'm not sure what to do now. I think it would be nice if Atom 1.0
could work with XHTML 1.0 and 2.0. But that means tinkering a bit with
the language.
| Future versions of XHTML may
| or may not have a DIV element.
In theory, sure, but in practice? HTML isn't likely to lose the
element with the local-name "div" is it, really?
| I agree that this might be out the
| scope of Atom, but it does create problems for interoparability.
Yep.
| Also, what do you expect feed readers to support for XHTML versions, etc.
I don't have any. I'll tailor my content to suit what the major
vendors support, just like I do with my plain old HTML today. In
practice, my feeds contain no markup at all (because I'm still
generating RSS and I will not produce escaped markup).
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The effects of weakness are
http://nwalsh.com/ | inconceivable, and more prodigious than
| those of the most violent
| passions.--Cardinal De Retz
pgpHu4lABzlAv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
