Comments on: Goodbye XHTML 2 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/ Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:32:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: 173. UX | Boagworld http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/comment-page-1/#comment-814999 173. UX | Boagworld Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:58:22 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1811#comment-814999 [...] little movement from the working group. According to Bruce Lawson the decision to drop XHTML will make little difference to most developers. However, one can at least expect to see an acceleration is the adoption of HTML 5 and hopefully [...] [...] little movement from the working group. According to Bruce Lawson the decision to drop XHTML will make little difference to most developers. However, one can at least expect to see an acceleration is the adoption of HTML 5 and hopefully [...]

]]> By: HTML 5 oder XHTML 2 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/comment-page-1/#comment-661306 HTML 5 oder XHTML 2 Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:04:37 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1811#comment-661306 [...] Everything you know about XHTML is wrong - Goodbye XHTML 2 - HTML 5 + XML = XHTML 5 - 2022, or when will HTML 5 be ready? XHTML 1.0 ist nicht (viel) mehr als [...] [...] Everything you know about XHTML is wrong – Goodbye XHTML 2 – HTML 5 + XML = XHTML 5 – 2022, or when will HTML 5 be ready? XHTML 1.0 ist nicht (viel) mehr als [...]

]]> By: Joshua http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/comment-page-1/#comment-617784 Joshua Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:45:03 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1811#comment-617784 The only thing I was looking forward to in concerns with XHTML2 was the generic <code>h</code> tag, delivering us from the illness of numbering headings. But all in all, it's worth losing XHTML2 and just having one main standard. As HTML 5 has its own XML serialization (often called (X)HTML5, or less-commonly, HTML5+XML), I agree, any worry that people have over losing XML is unnecessary. So the effects of losing XHTML2? Minimal. The main effect of it would be a final release from wondering which spec would make it (if it wasn't already obvious two or three years ago). It offers some final closure, and in the end we'll still have much the same options, if not more. We keep the img tag, we keep br as breaking within paragraph level (as is sensible), we have canvas, we have object, video, and audio, and we lose all the presentational attributes and elements that CSS handles to begin with! It can all be handled by one standard now, and with less investment! Score!!! The only thing I was looking forward to in concerns with XHTML2 was the generic h tag, delivering us from the illness of numbering headings. But all in all, it’s worth losing XHTML2 and just having one main standard. As HTML 5 has its own XML serialization (often called (X)HTML5, or less-commonly, HTML5+XML), I agree, any worry that people have over losing XML is unnecessary.

So the effects of losing XHTML2? Minimal. The main effect of it would be a final release from wondering which spec would make it (if it wasn’t already obvious two or three years ago). It offers some final closure, and in the end we’ll still have much the same options, if not more. We keep the img tag, we keep br as breaking within paragraph level (as is sensible), we have canvas, we have object, video, and audio, and we lose all the presentational attributes and elements that CSS handles to begin with! It can all be handled by one standard now, and with less investment! Score!!!

]]> By: David http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/comment-page-1/#comment-617615 David Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:05:34 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1811#comment-617615 The lack of <code>href</code> anywhere (without the need for a separate <code><a></code>) is what I was saying was disappointing. <code>href</code>-within-<code><a></code> anywhere is still an improvement. The lack of href anywhere (without the need for a separate <a>) is what I was saying was disappointing. href-within-<a> anywhere is still an improvement.

]]> By: bruce http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/comment-page-1/#comment-617531 bruce Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:53:47 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1811#comment-617531 Why is "<code>a</code>-anywhere" disappointing, David? Why is “a-anywhere” disappointing, David?

]]> By: David http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/goodbye-xhtml-2/comment-page-1/#comment-617452 David Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:03:18 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1811#comment-617452 Oh, so you really meant <code><a></code>. That makes more sense. Alas, the situation is still disappointing, as is the lack of “<code>src</code> anywhere”. Oh, so you really meant <a>. That makes more sense. Alas, the situation is still disappointing, as is the lack of “src anywhere”.

]]>