There are still so many features that had been introduced there (client-side includes with fallback, “everything is a link”, etc) that are still sorely missing 8-(
I wonder if there was also a growing dislike for XML in general behind this choice? (hurr durr namespace confusing). It's ironic that we have to thank MS for pushing for the little support of XML in browsers we still have (and they are now working on removing 8-/).
IIRC the WHATWG was set up before Google had its own browser (I think it was Mozilla + Opera + Apple at the time?) and it almost made sense, although there was no reason to ditch XHTML 2.0 altogether. What really drives me mad is that EVEN IF one could consider the XEvent and XForms interface to be suboptimal for the kind of “dynamic” web that was being pushed (possibly by Google behind the scenes) that was really no reason to throw away the whole of XHTML 2.
"A spokesperson for the European Commission told The Cube, Euronews' fact-checking team, that the EU is not launching or funding any social media platform, and that there is currently no EU-backed project called "W"
[...] W is a privately owned social media start-up incorporated in Sweden, backed by private investors mainly from the Nordic region."
Nella cattolicissima #Malta è in vigore la legge sull'#aborto più retriva d'Europa. Mentre la società civile chiede una norma più laica il governo prova a uscire dall'imbarazzo promettendo la grazia per le donne condannate per interruzione di gravidanza.👇 https://www.quotidiano.net/luce/attualita/aborto-malta-8bd29db4
By the way, whenever I'm in the West, my confidence in my English speaking really takes a hit. I have a hard time understanding people if they speak even a little bit fast, and I feel like communication is a struggle because my own accent is so strong. 😩