Re:Forking HTML into a static language doesn't make sense
by WorldMaker on Monday June 22, 2020 @12:55PM
(#23602525)
4) The W3C HTML spec is now mostly just a placeholder that says "Whatever WHATWG thinks is best" and it is almost but not quite true that WHATWG's Living Spec is increasingly "Whatever works in Chromium/Chrome"
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Forking HTML into a static language doesn't make sense
by zokier on Monday June 22, 2020 @03:13PM
(#23604691)
Well XHTML 2.0 was such a roaring success that I'm sure they'll be super stoked to take on another project to improve HTML as hypertext without the baggage of browser backing and buyin.
Re:Forking HTML into a static language doesn't make sense
by WorldMaker on Monday June 22, 2020 @04:25PM
(#23606045)
Correct, the debate over XHTML 2.0 was exactly why the WHATWG was formed. It's indeed how the W3C lost most of its teeth in browser standards. XHTML 2.0 had some good ideas, but it shows how hard it is to govern standards from ivory towers.