First of all, the media type should still be "application/xhtml+xml" for XHTML 2.0, although application/xml or even text/html may be used.
I don't think whole XHTML 2.0 document needs to be contained in the content or summary element, it is too complicated. Using the div element is still a suitable way (div is remained in XHTML 2.0 without major changes, http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-structural.html#edef_structural_div) I think. For browsers' implementation, in fact, XHTML 1.1 is still not well-supported. CSS 2 is another example of poor implementation by browsers. I do think that Atom should not be easy to change or be updated very frequently. That's why Atom should leave some extents of forward compatibility. Franklin -----Original Message----- From: Henri Sivonen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 17:43 To: Tse Shing Chi ((Franklin/Whale)) Cc: Atom Syntax Subject: Re: Forward Compatibility On Nov 19, 2006, at 04:33, Tse Shing Chi ((Franklin/Whale)) wrote: > This means that XHTML 2 contents can be used as follows? > > <content type="xhtml"> > <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xhtml2/";> > <!-- Contents XHTML 2.0 --> > </div> > </content> > > <content type="application/xhtml+xml"> > <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xhtml2/";> > <!-- Contents XHTML 2.0 --> > </div> > </content> > > By the way, are they the same? They are not the same and neither is correct. The correct way would be: <content type="application/xml"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xhtml2/";> <head> <title>The title of the entry again</title> </head> <body> <!-- Contents XHTML 2.0 --> </body> </html> </content> But it isn't worthwhile to spend energy on this issue. Browser vendors have been ignoring XHTML 2.0 and now even the W3C itself is moving aside the group that has been working on the XHTML 2.0 spec. -- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
