Who needs XHTML Namespace?

[Paul Prescod]

David Megginson wrote:
> 
> Paul Prescod writes:
> 
>  > What is the virtue in discovering XHTML data in an arbitrary
>  > document if there are *no rules* about what that information will
>  > look like? Are you really going to write processors that do not
>  > care whether images occur within titles or tables within images?
> 
> Sure -- a search engine is a very good example of one.

Really? Search engines don't care whether <title>s have images in them?
Or whether <h1>'s have <table>'s in them? I'm sure that there are some
that don't but I'm equally sure that there are some that do.

You didn't address my main point: XHTML mixed with other namespaces is
not ready for prime time. There is no definition of conformance for
either documents or processors. Until it is ready for prime time
namespaces are superflurous. They don't tell you anything you couldn't
have got from the DOCTYPE.

 Paul Prescod

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