|
You (the author of this article) have a valid point when you say people will want to upgrade to XHTML 2, against the HTML Working Group's expectation/intention. From the tone of this article, one would assume you find this a bad development; I however disagree: I think people should update their website to comply with the latest standards. Authors will have to rewrite their pages into XHTML 2.0, but, with server-side scripting and CSS in mind, this should be a not so very difficult task.
You are right when you say IE is not XHTML 2 compatible, which is yet another reason not to use IE, and yet another reason to tell other people not to use IE.
On a different note, I think your tests of XHTML 2.0 compatibility are rather useless. XHTML 2.0 is not even out of public draft yet. Aiming to be the first to analyse new developments is generally a good attitude, but I don't think you should bother checking mainstream browser compliance of those that do not officially support the implementation of a standard which is yet to be finalized. After all, you were writing an article about XHTML 2 and not about the poor implementation the OBJECT HTML (not XHTML) object in IE, right?
|
Previous Message
