SpringFlowers AutumnMoon wrote: > Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: >> SpringFlowers AutumnMoon wrote: >> [...] >>> hm... so the XHTML will just be used as html... >> >> Not really; the DOCTYPE still tells the browser that it's XHTML. > > except IE use it as HTML.
Perhaps...but better browsers will understand it for what it is. In other words, it degrades gracefully. [...] >> >> Most browsers have no problem. IE is the exception, sort of. > > Please note that MOST BROWSERS out there are IE. about 66%. So how do > you mean most browser has no problem when 66% of browsers have problem? I was counting distinct programs, not total number of client installations. Anyway, it's extremely dangerous to rely on across-the-board statistics like these. It's well established that different sites can have *wildly* different browser usage figures. Besides, IE's market share is shrinking as more and more people recognize it for the piece of crap it is. [...] > > I hope you won't accuse people of something. Huh? > HTML is a standard. XHTML > is a standard. If some people want to use a particular standard, it is > not so bad as "creating a problem out of thin air". Yes it is. HTML is an obsolescent standard, basically simply a matter of backwards compatibility at this point. XHTML is the way forward, for reasons I've already explained. If you follow the procedure I have recommended, XHTML does not even cause problems with IE. That is a fact. So why make more work for yourself by not using it? Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
