• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@r...>
• To: Dan Brickley <danbri@d...>
• Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:40:15 -0400

Dan Brickley wrote:
> You write "Typically, Working Groups are rechartered if there is 
> active interest in their work and they are close to their goal, as the 
> XHTML Working Group is. Another year of effort would probably be 
> sufficient to finish the XHTML specifications."
>
> Although not as high-profile as a REC-track group, there is nothing to 
> stop a group of like-minded W3C members single-handedly chartering an 
> Incubator Group (XG, see http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ ) to try to 
> progress the XHTML efforts. Perhaps - in part - by defining a recovery 
> model for ill-formed XML markup?

But it looks like XHTML5 is slated to replace it.

Can we count on XHTML5 to meet all the requirements of XHTML?

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XHTML 2 Working Group won't be renewed?
    • From: Dan Brickley <danbri@d...>

• References:
  • XHTML 2 Working Group won't be renewed?
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@r...>
  • Re: XHTML 2 Working Group won't be renewed?
    • From: Dan Brickley <danbri@d...>