Re: [xml-dev] What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?

From
Robin Berjon <>
To
Date
2002-11-20T15:37:00Z
ID
<>
Thread
Re: [xml-dev] What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?
 wrote:
> In a message dated 20/11/2002 14:43:18 GMT Standard Time, 
>  writes:
>> <wild_supposition type="breathless">You just have to wonder why anyone 
>> would bother continually responding to obvious flame 
>> bait</wild_supposition>
 >
> Hi Ann,
> 
> I will simply observe that your response totally lacks any logical 
> argument to support the supposition that XHTML 2.0 is a good idea or 
> that it is relevant in the changing world which will soon be upon us.

The logic is quite simple:

   -  can't refrain from posting ugly HTML to mailing lists
   - XHTML 2.0 is a big improvement on ugly HTML
     => XHTML 2.0 will make several lists less painful to follow

-- 
Robin Berjon <>
Research Engineer, Expway
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488