• From: Dan Brickley <danbri@d...>
• To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@r...>
• Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:45:43 +0200

On 7/7/09 16:40, Jonathan Robie wrote:
> 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?

What are they?

http://www.google.com/search?q=xhtml+requirements finds a few things but 
nothing obviously up-to-date and appropriate...

cheers,

Dan

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