Rick Merrill wrote:
Philip TAYLOR wrote:
don't expect that the page that you write today will necessarily be valid in
one year's time.
That's why I put a link to the validator on each page, but I failed to realize
that the standards could change so fast;-)
The problem is (and this is not something that is widely appreciated),
HTML 5 is /not/ a standard. It may become one, it may not; at the
moment it is a draft specification, a work-in-progress : it has not
been afforded the W3C seal of approval by becoming a formal recommendation,
unlike HTML 4.01 and related specifications. As the W3C HTML 5 page
proudly trumpets :
This is a work in progress! For the latest updates from the HTML WG, possibly
including important bug fixes, please look at the editor's draft instead.
whereas under "W3C HTML Specifications" we read :
Specifications HTML
HTML+ ~July 1993 HTML 2.0, RFC 1866, November 1995, Tim Berners Lee, Dan
Connolly HTML 3.2, W3C Recommendation, 14 January 1997, Dave Raggett, Author
HTML 4.01, W3C Recommendation, 24 December 1999, Dave Raggett, Arnaud Le Hors,
Ian Jacobs, Editors
XHTML
XHTML 1.0, W3C Recommendation, revised 1 August 2002, Steven Pemberton, et al.,
Authors XHTML™ 1.1 - Module-based XHTML, W3C Recommendation, 31 May 2001,
Murray Altheim, Shane McCarron, Editors
Future of HTML and XHTML
HTML5, a work in progress, intends to replace HTML 3.2, HTML 4, and XHTML 1.x.
Philip Taylor
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
