So you read the article XHTML 3.0 announced! and wanted more information.

Aprillia, aprillia!

Aprillia, aprillia, syö silliä ja juo kuravettä päälle!
Njäh, njäh! Levitäthän sanaa tästä sivusta? → →  http://w2c.shorturl.com

Sorry, you just need to figure out what that means.

See also: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header (RFC 3514, 1 April 2003).

Did you miss these?

• The abbreviation W3C is often written as W³C, but that’s not the same as W²C.
• “Linguage franca” is an intentional misspelling of “lingua franca” in lingua franca style.
• The misspelling “underlining” (for “underlying”) in “the underlining XML technology” was unintentional, but it was intentionally preserved after I noticed it.
• The color name lighgreen is nonstandard, and by CSS specifications, browsers should ignore a CSS declaration that uses it. (Stewart Gordon has kindly pointed out that the name lighgreen does not occur in the announcement. That’s true; lightgreen appears there, and is recognized by some browsers. This, incidentally, shows that “mnemonic” color names are rather problematic: it’s hard to remember which of them are standard, and you might mistype them more easily than color codes, since you know you need to be careful with numeric codes.)
• The use of blockquote for indentation has always been a paradigmatic symptom of bad HTML authoring.
• “Generic Identifier Omission” (GOI) is an invented term and idea, in the form presented in the “announcement”. However, “generic identifier” is a real SGML concept, corresponding to “tag name” or “element name”, and it may, in fact, be omitted in certain conditions, by SGML rules. (Web browsers haven’t bothered implementing such features.)
• The markup <font size=10> mentioned as an example of natural default units would conflict with HTML rules, according to which such a tag is valid – but the size attribute is interpreted in a peculiar way, not as points.
• The CSS 3 specification is under preparation, but the progress has been very slow. Generally, even CSS 2 has been far ahead of any industry standards, but Microsoft has actually implemented quite a few extensions, i.e. its own idea of CSS.

When I wrote the document, I didn’t realize what XSL-FO (eXtensible Stylesheet Language – Formatting Objects) is. It’s actually a much better parody, except that it is presumably wasn’t meant to be. But maybe the parody is implicitly revealed in its verbosity, which probably ensures it will never gain popularity. Take this example from a nice XSL-FO tutorial:

<fo:block font-family="Times" font-size="14pt" font-style="italic">
<fo:inline color="red">H</fo:inline>ello,
  <fo:inline font-weight="bold">world!</fo:inline>
</fo:block>