On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:51:53 +0200, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anne van Kesteren forwarded this from Shane McCarron:
XHTML2 will be using the same namespace as XHTML1, and there will not be
two modules.
This has been an "issue" in the XHTML2 draft for some time:
http://www.w3.org/T
On 9/12/06, Matthew Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For example,
> XHTML2's element has basically completely different semantics
> than XHTML1's.
That's because XHTML 2.0 simply reuses XForms in the XHTML namespace,
so the HTML WG isn't the place to debate this, unfortunately.
Yeah.
W
Ian Hickson wrote:
> I would be more concerned about how they are intending on making
> XHTML2 compatible with XHTML1 than with the WHATWG work.
Hopefully they won't revive the |version| attribute, as John M. Boyer
has suggested.
> For example,
> XHTML2's element has basically completely diff
Anne van Kesteren forwarded this from Shane McCarron:
XHTML2 will be using the same namespace as XHTML1, and there will not be
two modules.
This has been an "issue" in the XHTML2 draft for some time:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/conformance.html#s_conform_issue_4
On 9/12/06, Lachlan Hunt <[EMA
Anne van Kesteren forwarded this from Shane McCarron:
XHTML2 will be using the same namespace as XHTML1, and there will not be
two modules.
Great news! I wonder how open the HTML WG will be with regards to
working with the WHATWG and HTML 5, especially now that the 2 specs will
share the sam
Might be of interest...
--- Forwarded message ---
From: "Shane McCarron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: www-html-editor@w3.org
Subject: Re: [xhtml-role] Extensibility of XHTML 1 and XHTML 1.1 (PR#9627)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:01:25 +0200
XHTML2 will be using the same n
