> >>> I thought XHTML transitional _is_ XML. In what way is XHTML > >>> transitional is a "less strict data format"? > >> > >> It's a transition. It's a half-way house between HTML 4 and XHTML as > >> it > >> is intended (XHTML Strict). > > > > Are you saying that XHTML transitional is a "less strict data format" > > than XML too or are you off on some tangent? > > If the the former then please explain in it more detail, I really am > > under the impression that XHTML transitional is XML - that being so, > > in what way can it (XHTML transitional) be a less strict data format > > (than XML)? > > I *think* that the transitional aspect is related to the set of > available tags, rather than it's XML suitability. A lot of > behavioural/presentational tags and tag attributes were removed from > strict, but left in for transitional. > > Whether XHTML is valid XML is beyond my knowledge, but I believe it is. >
Valid XHTML Transitional *is* valid XML, just as <babooba>Wahoo</babooba> can be a valid XML element. It has rules to follow, just like any standard, so in that respect all standards are as strict as each other - you have to stick to the rules. ---------------- Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
