Gunnar, you never fail to do the unusual ;-) XHTML 1.0 but served as HTML I'll bet? 😇
Gunnar Bittersmann @g16n
22 Feb 2021
Replying to @mholzschlag
I’ve built a frameset 2 days ago: bittersmann.de/cssbattle/col… XHTML 1.0 Frameset, of course. 🤣
1
3
Yep. Serving as application/xhtml+xml would cause too much pain, I guess.
2
2
Sad, since who knows what could have come about with XML apps (sez me who stayed in HTML WG 'til charter lost pre XHTML 2.0)! But, people have managed it. Pain, yes. But your command of your toolbox is unique and long-lasting. R.E.S.P.E.C.T. my friend!
1
1
Yea, it’s sad that @Hixie & Co. never understood the merits of XML.
2
2
Today’s a good day to translate this tweet of mine nitter.vloup.ch/g16n/status/1035… “XML is silly, namespaces are silly, XHTML is silly, HTML5 is cool.” Some time later: “We need scope! How about prefixes?” #facepalm
Gunnar Bittersmann @g16n
31 Aug 2018
Replying to @g16n @raphaelokon_ @ttepasse
„XML ist doof, Namensräume sind doof, XHTML ist doof, HTML5 ist cool.“ Einige Zeit später: „Wir brauchen Scope! Wie wär’s mit Präfixen?“ #Gesichtspalme
2
1
2
Martynas Jusevičius
 @namedgraph
28 Jul 2017
#WebComponents: bring back #XML w/ dashes & w/o namespaces, invent shadow DOM instead of #XSLT support in browsers. 20 yrs, no real progress
2
1
2
Replying to @namedgraph @g16n @Hixie
HTML5 did have an XML application methodology for using the semantics at least we should have much but I do want both. I don't want and either this wins or that wins they both have Merit for different things. One needs a hammer and a nail the other needs please stop obfuscation.

Feb 25, 2021 · 12:28 AM UTC

1
Replying to @mholzschlag @namedgraph @Hixie
A limited subset of XML. IIRC you can’t do this in XHTML5: <!DOCTYPE html [ <!ENTITY nnbsp "&#x202F;"> ]> <html> <head> <title>narrow no-break space</title> </head> <body> <p>J.&nnbsp;R.&nnbsp;R. Tolkien</p> </body> </html>
1
1