Bug 161463 (xhtml2)

XHTML 2.0 tracking



17 years ago
3 years ago


(Reporter: megabyte, Assigned: hjtoi-bugzilla)


({meta, xhtml})

meta, xhtml
Dependency tree / graph

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)




(2 attachments)



17 years ago
Here we go again...


17 years ago
Keywords: meta, xhtml
This is a long ways off...
Assignee: harishd → heikki
Severity: normal → enhancement
Component: Parser → XML
QA Contact: moied → petersen
Target Milestone: --- → Future

Comment 2

17 years ago
Adding dependency on XForms
Depends on: 97806
alias for faster searching
Alias: xhtml2


17 years ago
Hardware: PC → All

Comment 4

17 years ago
adding dependency on XML Events
Depends on: 164482

Comment 5

17 years ago
Sjoerd Visscher ( sjoerd@w3future.com ) has a XBL based prototype of parts of
the XHTML 2.0 Draft at http://w3future.com/weblog/gems/xhtml2.xml

I don't see any information regarding which license the code is under, but it
would not hurt to contact him and check it out -- I will let you guys know what

Comment 6

17 years ago
You can use my XBL files if you want. But I'm pretty sure it's not the way to
implement xhtml 2.0 in Mozilla. It's too slow to convert each node to it's xhtml
1 .1 equivalent with javascript. An XSL conversion is much faster (
http://w3future.com/weblog/gems/xhtml2.xsl ) and it is more flexible than XBL.
I'd be extremely happy if Composer only wrote XHTML2.  It seems like it would be
easier than HTML4 on front and back end.

Comment 8

17 years ago
re #6, I looked at at both the xslt and the xbl implementation.

First of all, let's rule out xslt. It's very unlikely fast, for one. But more
importantly, it changes the displayed document, which makes it impossible
to use js on the original document.

About the performance drag for the xbl version, the attribute foo is probably
really simple and doens't require js, as long as it isn't requiring any
translation of the values.
http://www.xulplanet.com/tutorials/xultu/xblatin.html talks attribute 
inheritance. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xbl/xbl.html#anonymous-attributes
calls it forwarding, of course ;-)
Adding something like Attribute Value Templates (see
http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt.html#dt-attribute-value-template) to XBL sounds like
a bad idea on a second thought, as more complex algorithms in the evaluation
cause trouble to keep stuff synched in dxhtml2. (Yeah, fancy acronym.)
I don't know if this is required by a xhtml2 implementation, though.

Stuff like the object tag, unifying two html tags is probably a bit more

Sjoerd, maybe you could add a relicensed version of the mozilla part of your
stuff to this bug?
QA Contact: petersen → ian


16 years ago
Depends on: 162479
*** Bug 186985 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 10

16 years ago
Created attachment 112513 [details]
New XHTML 2.0 tags in res\html.css

I modify the html.css. I add XHTML 2.0 selectors.

Comment 11

16 years ago
From the xhtml 2 spec of the quote element:
"Visual user agents must not add delimiting quotation marks"

So you should remove this part:

quote:before {
  content: open-quote;

quote:after {
  content: close-quote;

Comment 12

16 years ago
Created attachment 112536 [details]
New XHTML 2.0 tags in res\html.css ver 0.2

I remove content from quote.
That patch uses the wrong namespace for XHTML2.

In any case we must not implement this until XHTML2 is in CR.

Comment 14

16 years ago
Namespace in patch is form 3.1.1. Strictly Conforming Documents -
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xhtml2-20021218/xhtml2.html What's wrong with it?

Comment 16

16 years ago
Mozilla should see the most popular formats like: mpeg, avi, mov (video), mp3,
wav, midi, aiff (sound) not only amimation like gif or mng and images like jpeg,
gif or png. Because in XHTML 2.0 there are not <img>, there are <object>. So
XHTML support not only images (or animations) but also video and sound.

Comment 17

16 years ago
adding [meta] and setting component to Tracking
Component: XML → Tracking
Summary: XHTML 2.0 tracking → [meta] XHTML 2.0 tracking


16 years ago
Depends on: 175107


15 years ago
Summary: [meta] XHTML 2.0 tracking → XHTML 2.0 tracking


15 years ago
No longer depends on: 162479

Comment 18

15 years ago
Why was bug 162479 removed from the dependancies?
Blocks: 162479

Comment 19

15 years ago
Because XFrames has nothing to do with XHTML 2.0. It is a standalone XML
language (some published articles get this wrong).
No longer blocks: 162479


15 years ago
Depends on: 33339


14 years ago
Depends on: 275196


14 years ago
No longer depends on: 275196

Comment 21

14 years ago
Almost a year after the previous update, the 7th draft was published in May 2005:

Diff-marked version compared to 20040722 here:


13 years ago
Depends on: 325208

Comment 22

12 years ago
8th draft :

Diff compared to 2005 05 27 :

Comment 23

10 years ago
Guess this is a WONTFIX now then?


Comment 24

10 years ago
yeah the w3 will be stopping it. I'm not too fond of this xhtml 5 business though :(

Comment 25

10 years ago
> I'm not too fond of this xhtml 5 business
though :(

I'm sure you mean HTML 5. It seems you really got attached to XHTML ;-)
No longer depends on: 33339
XHTML2 is not going to happen.
Last Resolved: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Product: Core → Core Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.