On 20 Okt, 09:53, andrew23 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > See:http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml > <quote> > Sending XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful > ====================================== > > The advantages of XHTML > ----------------------- > > When sent as application/xhtml+xml, XHTML has several advantages: > > 1. XHTML content will be able to be mixed-and-matched with content > from other well-known namespaces (in particular, MathML). This > is the main advantage for content authors. > > 2. Browsers will immediately catch well-formedness errors (though > other errors still won't be caught). > > 3. Tools interacting with XHTML documents are guaranteed a > well-formed document. > > However, none of these apply when an XHTML document is sent as > text/html, and since authors feel their pages should be readable on > the most popular Web browser, which does not support > application/xhtml+xml, there is basically no point in using XHTML at > the moment. > > Conclusion > ---------- > > There are few advantages to using XHTML if you are sending the > content > as text/html, and many disadvantages.
If you are sending XHTML only as 'text/html' then there is no advantage at all. If you're using content negotiation and serve XHTML as 'application/xhtml+xml' to browsers that support Xhtml, then it is another story. You can serve accessible figures with text in different languages, and math that is both accessible and readable. To browsers that support gif, jpeg and png, but not namespaces you might have to supply an bitmapped image or an very long description. > </quote> Point 1., 2. and 3. is in the quote is still valid. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ -- You received this because you are subscribed to the "Design the Web with CSS" at Google groups. To post: [email protected] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
