What XHTML 2 Means to Us
I don’t always agree with everything Jeffery Zeldman says, but I definitely respect that he’s an authority on many web-related things and that a vast majority of what he says is spot on.
Take, for instance, his recent posting about XHTML 2. He explains how it’s quite different from the current evolutionary line of HTML 1, 2, 3,4, XHTML 1, 1.1, etc. For better or worse, the framers of the current spec proposal want to introduce a radically different markup language. I have no problem with that at all and, in fact, a lot of things in XHTML 2 sound very interesting (ex: XForms).
What I do have a problem with, though, is its name. If the proposed spec is not the next step after XHTML 1.1 (and it’s clearly not since the corrent evolutionary line will continue to be developed), why the hell is it being called “XHTML 2”?? Obviously, that name implies that it’s the successor to XHTML 1 (or 1.1) even though that isn’t the case. Hell, just rename the stupid proposal to something else and almost everyone would stop complaining about how it’s going to ruin everything.
Posted Tuesday April 15, 2003 in Web Development by Chris Curtis
This is an older entry and as such, it may be by a guest author or contain formatting problems / extraneous code. If you notice something wrong with the entry, please use the Contact page to let me know the entry title and issue.