3 ms·
If you call web browser vendors mutinying against the W3C who was pushing XHTML 2 down their throats "politics", which lead to Apple, Mozilla and Opera creating
by alwillis 9y ago
If you call web browser vendors mutinying against the W3C who was pushing XHTML 2 down their throats "politics", which lead to Apple, Mozilla and Opera creating the Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group (WHATWG) and to HTML5--then I'm okay with the politics.
Yeah, I could close my tags and validate my code with the best of them back when XHTML was a thing--but that's no way to live. I'm glad WHATWG stepped in and literally saved the web from itself. OMG! XHTML 2 would have sucked so much!
- contras1970 9y ago> XHTML 2 would have sucked so much! why/how? because you'd have to close your tags and validate your code?
- wiredearp 9y agoThe way I remember it, there was a guy called Hixie something that was in charge of standards implementation at Mozilla and made a terrific job at that. But then he got hired by Opera and saw that there was no point in competing with Gecko and so he started a FUD campaign called "XHTML considered harmful" to lower market standards. He bluffed you into believing that namespaces are far too complicated for the human mind to comprehend, when in reality XHTML hadn't caught on because the CMS systems were not up to date. He did a terrific job at that, so he got hired by Google to publish a competing specification that was actually based on the way that Internet Explorer 6 parses HTML4. He did at terrific job at that, so we are finally back where we started, with a standard that lives forever while IE6 is long gone, and Goggle can scavenge the specifications from this forgotten future for ideas they can present as original. Even Mozilla played along with the HTML5 scheme, it was like watching a nuclear superpower go down in a fist fight. How can you not call that politics?