Posted by Spartanicus on 12/28/05 01:52

"Greg N." <yodel_dodel@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I believe the people who develop the HTML standard have discussed the
>necessity and feasibility of client-side HTML fragment inclusion. And
>they have obviously decided we don't need it.
>
>Why?

Some things cannot be added to HTML without fundamentally breaking every
single UA in existence. "Client side inclusion" of code fragments is
such a feature. Thus addition of such a feature can only be considered
for a version of the language that is not backward compatible by design.
IIRC the current XHTML2 proposals offer a "client side inclusion"
feature, XHTML2 as it stands is not backward compatible.

Compare that with for example the hypothetical addition of a <poetry>
element to the language. Although it would also not be backward
compatible, existing UAs would ignore the element as per the language
requirements and render the contents.

--
Spartanicus

[Back to original message]