 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] RE: [Structure Module] Renaming the <html> element to more semantic name
From: John Foliot - WATS.ca <foliot@wats.ca>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 08:03:31 -0500 To: 'Asbjørn Ulsberg' <asbjorn@tigerstaden.no>, <www-html-request@w3.org>, <www-html@w3.org> Message-ID: <000001c5fb2e$a476e590$6501a8c0@bosshog> Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote: > Isn't XHTML 2.0 supposed to be breaking most of this history and not > be backward-compatible anyway? Why does the 15 years of history with > <html> apply to XHTML 2.0 if none of the other (excuse my language) > rubbish from older HTML specifications doesn't? Actually Asbjørn, I thought the very same thing too, but my current debate with the XHTML Editors regarding the @key attribute seems to indicate that what they say and what they do doesn't always correspond - they are quite happy to keep "rubbish" for un-substantiated "historical" reasons, even when provided with multiple reasons for not dong so: http://www.wats.ca/articles/access+keystill=accesskey/80 JF -- John Foliot foliot@wats.ca Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca Web Accessibility Testing and Services http://www.wats.ca Phone: 1-613-482-7053Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2005 13:04:16 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||
