I did want to apologize for assuming that the XHTML errors I had recently were due to WhatWG members having fun at my expense. I've had people deliberately break my XHTML-based comments in the past when I've written about XHTML, and the break was documented with a screenshot in the web site of a WhatWG member. I put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5. (1/10/2009)

Anne VK est taquin (see via). -- Ceci dit j'admire Shelley pour maintenir ses sites en full xhtml + extensions > svg+rdfa. Mais Dieu que la route est difficile avec des navigateurs si peu adaptés. (Firefox et son yellow screen of death)

Google’s role is not free from the perception of conflict of interest, and that coupled with Ian’s endorsed role as a dictator will affect the credibility of the outcome produced. In particular, it will give Microsoft all of the excuse it needs to avoid implementing the standards. (Not that eliminating that excuse will magically cause Microsoft to participate…)

The spec uses "XHTML5" and so does Validator.nu. The term is pretty widely used on the Web.

Occurences du mot XHTML5 dans Google en prenant soin d'enlever les protagonistes du WhatWG, les aggrégateurs de contenu et les archivages des listes de discussions ? 3000. La bonne parole du WhatWG, ça ferait presque regretter les témoins de Jéhovah.

The <canvas> element supports drawing text on it via experimental Mozilla-specific APIs.