Sure, I agree. I think the explanation is simply the usual "path of minimum resistance". On the other hand I think HTML was meant for text and it still pretty

Sure, I agree. I think the explanation is simply the usual "path of minimum resistance". On the other hand I think HTML was meant for text and it still pretty much is. One thing I appreciate of the W3C is that rather than adding things on an existing standard they tend to create new standards. We have HTML, CSS, and SVG for example. CSS has also been modularised, and so was the plan for HTML. They've developed XPath, and MathML, RDF, and so on. For being a 20 years old format, HTML is surprisingly small. The problem I think it's Javascript. But hopefully it shouldn't be too hard in the future to move to a language agnostic web. My biggest complain at the moment would be one page apps, and some of ajax, that seem to break the old concept of the url. A small cost to pay though: I hope in the future they'll fix that.