The World Wide Web Consortium has announced plans to create a new HTML standard and to enhance the XHTML specification. The W3C is issuing a call for participation in the working group that will oversee the new standard, including Apple, Mozilla, Opera and Microsoft. In fact, Chris Wilson, platform architect of the Internet Explorer platform at Microsoft, is the co-chair of the new working group. The W3C is also inviting application developers and content designers to help design the next version of HTML by participating in the new W3C HTML Working Group. "HTML started simply, with structured markup, no licensing requirements, and the ability to link to anything. More than anything, this simplicity and openness has led to its tremendous and continued success. It's time to revisit the standard and see what we can do to meet the current community needs, and to do so effectively with commitments from browser manufacturers in a visible and open way," said Tim Berners-Lee, W3C director and inventor of HTML.
W3C officials originally intended to turn HTML into an XML-based format (XHTML, Extensible HTML), because of the benefits of XML formats, but slow adoption by traditional browser vendors and content developers changed that. The HTML Working Group originally intended to resume development of HTML in a manner that unifies HTML 4 and XHTML 1 but now they will take up the effort to advance the technology instead. The Web developer and design communities have called for the W3C to renew its commitment to HTML by adding new features. W3C officials also noted that because XHTML has proved valuable in many markets and the need for it continues to grow, the group is working on XHTML 2.0, which will define an XML syntax for the new HTML in addition to the classic HTML syntax.
News source: eWeek
W3C officials originally intended to turn HTML into an XML-based format (XHTML, Extensible HTML), because of the benefits of XML formats, but slow adoption by traditional browser vendors and content developers changed that. The HTML Working Group originally intended to resume development of HTML in a manner that unifies HTML 4 and XHTML 1 but now they will take up the effort to advance the technology instead. The Web developer and design communities have called for the W3C to renew its commitment to HTML by adding new features. W3C officials also noted that because XHTML has proved valuable in many markets and the need for it continues to grow, the group is working on XHTML 2.0, which will define an XML syntax for the new HTML in addition to the classic HTML syntax.
News source: eWeek
I'm looking forward to switching.
Basically, the ability to use XML tags in HTML. That way, i can have <pagetitle>Page Title</pagetitle> instead of <h2 class="pagetitle">Page Title</h2>
It would seriously cut down on divitis and classitis, and it would emphasis the notion of "HTML for structure, CSS for layout". It'd be a benefit to screen readers too, as "page title" means a lot more than "heading two".
Heck, even IE 6 support XSLT, and Firefox too, perhaps even Opera. And via XSLT, you can get far more advanced stuff than span or block tags, and even use it to transform it to outputs not intended for web browsers. It's very powerful.
View the page and source code for this web page for example:
http://www.4serendipity.com/xml/testfiles/total.xml
That's an XML document in "human readable" form transformed into something decent (but since it's just a sample, nothing too advanced) by an XSLT document that define the actual tag and attribute behavior. If you think CSS is nice to customize things, it's really nothing compared to XSLT.
Not XSLT, because you have to go through the processing time of the transformation, and that's a burden on the user. Plus, you have to write another full page of code to transform your custom tags back into standard HTML.
Not behaviors because they're IE specific.
The point would be adding what I said into the HTML spec and have it supported by the browser so something like XSLT or behaviors isn't required.
behaviors can be used in other browsers. See dean edwards article on how to use behaviors in Firefox for example.
I built an full WYSIWYG cross-browser editor for my company's content management system using custom tags controlled by behavioirs.
And you can already do this with the spec's, just define a custom DTD and add your tags and attributes to it, just realise that once you do it, it's not HTML/XHTML any more, it's a custom spec, so not every webbrowser has to support it.
If you all did your research you all would realize that you can make your own tag names in XHTML in which all major browser already support.
You can then set CSS tags to those custom tag names.
Personally I don't want them to make another HTML standard. Why have 2 conflicting languages (HTML, XHTML)?
XHTML was designed to cleanup HTML and set the rules of XML into XHTML.
We should only hve a small set of languages as to make things simple for both developers and browsers.
XHTML = Structure
CSS (or convert to XSL) = Page Layout and Design
XML = Data Source
Then your only left with adding PHP or ASP for Server SIde scripting and Javascript etc for client side.
Also would like to see things like XForms etc intergrated withingthe 3 base sets above. ie. XForms have the ability to be intergrated into the XHTML and pull and send data via XML.
I'll stop rambling now sorry, just my 2 bits.
And now they think there has indeed been enough trouble with XHTML? Then the only follow up question that appears to me is: what makes them think browsers will adopt to a new HTML standard if they couldn't (in W3C's eyes) even follow a well-formed format based on XML?? After all, XHTML is easier to implement than HTML in many cases, because it's a far more well-formed syntax, and less forgiving. It's largely adapted for ease of computer parsing, hence browser adoption.
I can't say these news made much sense to me... So now they'll do two concurrent standards; a follow up to HTML and XHTML 2?? With the usual varying implementations by browser vendors, I can only imagine what train wreck that can become for web developers to follow. I'm thinking "IE 8 supports these 'HTML 5' features, but not these 'XHTML 2' ones, but Firefox 4 supports a lot of 'XHTML 2' stuff, but hasn't gone as far in the 'HTML 5' area".
Ouch...
W3C is always working on new specs - the problem is that they're just never done.
I'll be waiting patiently, 5 years from now to implement the brand new specification.
At least the web is something that people can improve easily, thanks to them.
I just think, like you, that browsers take a LONG time to update to the new stuff. If W3C made their own public and free browser, then we'd always get the best out of the web.
More on that here
Are they a Norwegian Chef of the Muppets, trying to release another tag soup?
A multipurpose object element already exists, damn it!
HTML5 versus XHTML 2 - As per XHTML2, the a and img elements should be more than dead.
Last edited by tiagosilva29 on 07 Mar 2007 - 20:16
Hmm, not sure what I want... just a tag that actually works will make me happy
HTML5 is a mess IMO, XHTML actually makes sense (and if they aren't continuing pushing it hard because of major browsers, we may as well be on CSS1 with incomplete implementation of HTML4, as that's what the largest browser supports)
Anyways I know I'll be moving to XHTML 2.0 for sure. HTML is just too cumbersome for my liking.
Name just ONE browser that supports ANY language fully.
MS never cared about standards (they were just forced to be somewhat more standards compliant with IE7 due to the competition), and the IE guy would just twist the standards around in some weird way that fits MS bad.
MS never cared about standards (they were just forced to be somewhat more standards compliant with IE7 due to the competition), and the IE guy would just twist the standards around in some weird way that fits MS bad.
Does that sound extreme?
should build one, one of these days.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.