I guess I didn’t notice when the W3C released the fourth WD of XHTML 2.0, the upcoming version of the language we all know and love. (Okay, I’m generalizing.) I’ve liked the draft since the beginning, and now I like it even more. (By the way, if you’re not into computers, spare your brain; stop reading here.)
- I’m glad that
<cite>is back, since I just started using that wonderful little element.
- I don’t agree with changing
<l>; I’m afraid that some people will confuse it for the number 1. Why can’t they rename the element
- I’m dissappointed that they keep on changing the name for the element that names navigation lists. In my opinion, they should do away with the element completely, and just have people use the
- I’m confounded by a proposal for an attribute representing roots of words. How is that useful?
- I would like having a
<footer>element, although I’m not sure what I’d put in it.
- I would really like having semantic tags like
<nr>for numbers and
<date>for dates. You could do really neat things with that.
- People have been wondering if
<hr>should be removed or renamed. I think it should just be depreciated, because, in my estimation, the tag is only useful for separating sections denoted by the heading elements, which are depreciated in the draft. With the introduction of
<section>, I don’t think
<strong>? Remove it. Use
classes if necessary.
Of course, would anyone care what I have to say in this blog? Because almost anyone who would read this would already have stopped reading far earlier.