> it's not that it's bad for your clients, or isn't forward compatible, > or anything like that... it's just that he thinks developers will > give xhtml a bad name if they don't understand it.. which to me seems > really silly and is no basis to write a technical document like that.
Whats *really* silly is that he makes a religion out of it. He not only uses it as a basis for that document, but develops entire new specs and submits them to the W3C. I think most of this is entirely politically motivated, and most of it boils down to the mimetype issue. Anyways, i like serving XHTML as application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support it because: - the W3C says i SHOULD do that - the browser SHOUTS at me when i make a mistake, so i can fix it, rather than enter tag soup mode and hope the browsers AI figures out what i really meant. Same reason i like strictly typed programming languages btw. Cheers, Claus. -- claus wahlers côdeazur brasil http://codeazur.com.br _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
