I disagree - XHTML should be the norm for any new implementations ans certainly 
for anything "enterprise". Why? Well if it is XHTML it can be transformed and 
used in more ways. Sure you could parse HTML but why not fix it at source? 

I think large "enterprise" CMS systems are valid is a very few cases - like a 
large publisher. For the reset I think small standards compliant systems make 
more sense. Then use a federated approach to build the large "portal" by 
using/transforming content from the smaller systems.

Validation. Well any CMS can enforce valid mark-up. In the simplest form it 
could be a regular expression to parse submitted content. It is also easy to 
provide a validator and not allow content through approval that is not 
validated.

Authors - well as Marco points out (in subsequent post) that is simply a case 
of getting a decent editor for the job. One that generates XHTML and fixes 
imported wordprocessor content.

Regards

Johan
----------------
www.assetnow.com

> ------------Original Message------------
> From: Mark Stanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Fri, Dec-10-2004 1:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [WSG CMS] General CMS consensus
>
> XHTML - bleh. Why exactly? Personally I've only found a use for it
> once and that was a very specific case where XHTML file were the data
> storage medium (rather than a database).
> 
> Validation - true. I'd love to be able to say the CMS only allows
> valid code, but it doesn't :( I'd also love to say all the authors
> make sure they only write clean valid content rather than pasting word
> documents in, but...
> 
> Accessibility - yes. In my opinion its not too bad, but if you've got
> any suggestion or feedback I'd appreciate hearing it.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Stanton 
> Gruden Pty Ltd 
> http://www.gruden.com
> *********************************************************
> The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> *********************************************************
> 
> 
> 


*********************************************************
The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*********************************************************

Reply via email to