[whatwg] HTML 5 vs. XHTML 2.0
dean at edwards.name
Sun Nov 14 17:09:34 PST 2004
the increased discussion about XHTML2 vs HTML5 has prompted this email.
some things to consider:
* HTML5 *extends* HTML4
* HTML5 should be backwardly compatible with HTML4
* XHTML2 *improves* XHTML1
* XHTML2 is not backwardly compatible with XHTML1
* HTML4 tags are pretty similar to XHTML1 tags :-)
a lot of the current discussion arises from the fact that we have
labeled our specifications under the umbrella "HTML5". i agree with this
but it does lead us to compare/contrast with XHTML2. i think this is a
major issue and prompts many questions. how far do we mirror the XHTML2
improvements? if we adopt some but not others will this lead to further
confusion about web standards? it seems that versions of HTML have
already lurched in different directions.
however, extending HTML (especially the Forms module) is absolutely
necessary. how necessary are the other discussed changes (<q> vs
<quote>)? if we choose <quote> then what about the rest of the XHTML2
spec? i think we have to think hard about this before we add to the
confusion that web developers have to face. we have the opportunity to
clear up some of the existing confusion, with some careful pruning of
the original spec (goodbye <acronym>) but how far we go is a question
that should be debated thoroughly.
finally, if we do decide to /improve/ HTML does this require another
spec? i like the idea of the <name> and <file> elements but which of the
current specs do they belong? we need a new document to cover these
additions and many of (the discussed) deprecations (if we decide to go
in that direction).
sorry to be a wet blanket but i had to get these questions off my chest. ;-)
More information about the whatwg