Sorry if I'm too simplistic and never go down to the technical details. As I see it:
The HTML vs XHTML adoption is now somewhere between both points. Either we go for HTML missing sokme XHTML functionality that anyway we will barely use due to the overwhemming majority of IE users, either we go for XHTML needing to cut it up to serve HTML due to the same reason. Well, between both options I think it is consequent that the GNOME project takes the latter: - We are used to adopt standards before they become mainstream - this is how we help pushing openness and public standards to wider audiences - The browsers for the GNOME desktop support XHTML - Windows users are part of our target audience, but they are not our core target audience Also - If adopting XHTML now may help us developing full XHTML based services targeted to GNOME users, this might be a good strategy as well. What the GNOME project can't do is just wait Microsoft to adopt an innovative and agreed public standard and then wait that most of their users get the versions supporting it. Instead, what the GNOME project is doing is inviting Windows users to come to us in order to enjoy freedom, openness and innovation. Question for an ignorant: would it be feasible / difficult to serve XHTML to browsers supporting it and then offer an alternative HTML encoding to thos not supporting it? Is it worth all this effort? -- Quim Gil /// http://desdeamericaconamor.org
_______________________________________________ gnome-web-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-web-list
