• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XHTML survival rate?
• From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:58:24 +0200
• References: <41937298F962D411A87F004033E227AA2DA747@n...> <3CB544AE.7010007@d...> <027e01c1e136$db942fd0$4bc8a8c0@A...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020402 Debian/2:0.9.9-4

Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> From: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>
>  
> 
>>I think we have to face it: XML or not, pages on the web are what they 
>>are, we have no power to enforce any format or specification and will 
>>have to adapt our tools and relax our parsers if we don't want to 
>>restrict ourselves to accessing an insignificant proportion of the web.
> 
>  
> The shortcoming is not XHTML but XML.

Fair enough, but as Simon pointed out, XHTML == HTML + XML. If you 
remove XML from XHTML what do you have save HTML?

Eric

-- 
See you in Barcelona.
                               http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/schedule.asp
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org      http://4xt.org           http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------

• References:
  • RE: XHTML survival rate?
    • From: "Braumüller, Hans" <h.braumueller@h...>
  • Re: XHTML survival rate?
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • Re: XHTML survival rate?
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: RE: How do we call Javascript function in XSL file on Netscape (Ver 6.2) browser?
• Next by Date: carriage return handling in XML parsers
• Previous by thread: Re: XHTML survival rate?
• Next by thread: RE: XHTML survival rate?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread