On 9/12/07, Sandofsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Third, by giving users the option of creating html4 documents, you are > lending validity to the idea that html4 is fine. I believe few people > share that feeling. >
Okay, this idea needs to be shot down right here. HTML 4 *is*fine--standards uber-geek Anne Van Kesteren switched back to HTML from XHTML two years ago (http://annevankesteren.nl/2005/05/xhtml). XHTML in practice is just a reformulation of HTML (unless you are using XHTML 1.1 which few are) and offers nothing above and beyond HTML except for stricter parsing. Sure the majority of standards-based designers are using XHTML, but that is mostly an example of cargo-cult programming. You will even hear some people say XHTML is more semantic or some similar rubbish, but it is not. Make no mistake, XHTML is not innately superior to HTML, and there's no reason to believe XHTML 2 will beat HTML 5 as the defacto standard. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
