Re: Mephaph Online

Andreas Johansson scripsit:

> On the subject of webpages, the recent storm of posts re: XHTML 2 and similar
> has made me wonder how much backwards compability is to be expected. Back in
> the days, I considered myself a decent htmlizer, but since I have rather lost
> interest, forgotten much and learnt nothing of the new stuff that's appeared.
> Nonetheless, it would be nice to think I'll be able to use what competence I
> retain, for simple things like the Conlanging Pages, also in the forseeable
> future. For how long are new browsers likely to to be able to digest old-
> fashioned html with img tags and other stuff I gather they're doing away with
> in new standards?
Essentially nothing has been removed up to and including XHTML 1.0, except the
privilege of writing mismatched tags, omitting quotes around attribute values,
etc. etc.  XHTML 2 is a separate vocabulary, and many things have changed,
although the core remains the same.
--
John Cowan  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com  jcowan@reutershealth.com
All "isms" should be "wasms".   --Abbie