ATTN: Please comment on XHTML (before it's too late)

Braden N . McDaniel braden at
Sun Aug 29 22:37:13 BST 1999

On Sun, 29 Aug 1999 14:58:50 Ann Navarro wrote:
> At 02:43 PM 8/29/99 -0400, David Megginson wrote:
> >(and I think that Tim's throw-away number was, if anything, a gross
> >underestimate -- I cannot imagine even 1 in 1000 processes caring
> >about the difference between transitional and strict)
> <snip>
> >You and I, Paul have seen too many worthy specs fail completely
> >because of superfluous complexity -- HyTime, Topic Maps, and DSSSL
> >(and Architectural Forms) spring immediately to mind, but they hardly
> >stand alone.  Most specs fail anyway, complex or not (XML's success is
> >the exception rather than the rule), but it would be nice to give
> >XHTML at least a fighting chance.
> David,
> Did HTML 4.0 -- with it's three versions, fail from overcomplexity?

Definitely. Or, which HTML 4.0-conforming browsers did you have in mind?

Certainly HTML has succeeded, but HTML 4.0 just isn't a reality on the Web yet. I don't consider that successful.

Braden N. McDaniel
braden at

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list