http://www.w3.org/News/2009#item1192009-07-02: Today the Director announces that when the XHTML 2 Working Group charter expires as scheduled at the end of 2009, the charter will not be renewed. By doing so, and by increasing resources in the HTML Working Group, W3C hopes to accelerate the progress of HTML 5 and clarify W3C's position regarding the future of HTML. A FAQ answers questions about the future of deliverables of the XHTML 2 Working Group, and the status of various discussions related to HTML. Learn more about the HTML Activity.
XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
Moderator: General Moderators
XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
It's a good thing they decided to make it official, less dilemmas for web developers going forward. And HTML5 is shaping up very nicely as well.
- JAB Creations
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 2341
- Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:44 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
- Contact:
Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
I haven't checked of late, is HTML5 still pushing for the href attribute on all elements? If so I can't wait for the following websites to start popping up...
...and a versionless doctype is a forward compatibility disaster just waiting. XHTML 1.1 is the only way to go! 
Code: Select all
<html href="virus.exe"><head href="virus.exe"><title>Really friendly website!</title></head> <body href="virus.exe"> <div href="virus.exe"><p href="virus.exe">click here, you won't regret it!</p></div> </body></html>Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
How is that different from the current situation? You can wrap anything in an link element, you can onload anything, you can iframe everything, you can script any forced download, etcJAB Creations wrote:I haven't checked of late, is HTML5 still pushing for the href attribute on all elements? If so I can't wait for the following websites to start popping up...
In the end I think it's the responsibility of the web browser to make sure that if something is being downloaded or a link leads to a download, it should be transparent to the user about what is happening. A simple "Do you want to download the file virus.exe?" should be enough to prevent a user from going on. And then the next layer is the OS itself, which just shouldn't allow arbitrarily installation of programs, that's just stupid
Well it seems there will be no more working group after the end of 2009, so I'd say jump in and form your own group to fill the gapJAB Creations wrote: ...and a versionless doctype is a forward compatibility disaster just waiting. XHTML 1.1 is the only way to go!
Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
why would you need version in a doctype?JAB Creations wrote: ...and a versionless doctype is a forward compatibility disaster just waiting. XHTML 1.1 is the only way to go!
- JAB Creations
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 2341
- Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:44 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
- Contact:
Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
Foreword compatibility. By not declaring a version number HTML5's doctype declares that it is both no version and all versions of HTML. It's not if something different or contrary to HTML5 will exist in later versions, it's a matter of when.
Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
and what would that be? div=div, li=li, video=video etc. and it's not going to changeJAB Creations wrote:It's not if something different or contrary to HTML5 will exist in later versions, it's a matter of when.
they can still add version to later html versions (html6 etc.), in html5 lifetime there won't be such major changes
- JAB Creations
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 2341
- Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:44 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
- Contact:
Re: XHTML is dead. Long live HTML5
HTML5 != all versions of HTML && HTML !be all versions of HTML && HTML != the last version of HTML && HTML5 != Perfect to the extent things will not be deprecated in the future due to current shortsightedness.
There was really no point to creating audio and video elements, the object element allows the ability top specify the mime so the context of the object isn't out of question if the (X)HTML code is valid.
There was really no point to creating audio and video elements, the object element allows the ability top specify the mime so the context of the object isn't out of question if the (X)HTML code is valid.