Hi,
First of all... I'm sorry if this is off topic.
I've been telling people (the few who asked me and through my website) to use (valid) xhtml because it a W3C recommendation, it's device independent, (valid) xhtml can be processed by an XML parser, better accessibility, less code, faster processing of code in modern browsers, forward compatibility etc. I guess that's the standard opinion on xhtml or am I completely of track here?
Hi Kim, that's a hot issue in the web standards world. Basically, i think the main points can be presented as:
XHTML real, present and unique features:
- Ready for XML parsing
- Ready for mixing with other XML syntaxes, such MathML. The canonical example being is Jaques Distler's weblog.
XHTML not-so-clear feature:
- Forward-compatibility. Some say it's a legit advantage over HTML, some say, since valid HTML is so easily tranformed into valid XHTML, it's a draw.
XHTML myths:
- Faster loads. - More accesible 'per se' than Strict HTML. It's not.
XHTML problems:
- The mime-type issues. - Zero-tolerance for markup errors (if served with the right mime-type)
So, if you've done your homework and take an informed decision, it pretty much comes down to a matter of project requirements + personal taste. Some people see the point in using XHTML, regardless the problems. Some people don't. Myself, i'm sticking with HTML 4.01 Strict, until necessity or the will to experiment force me otherwise.
Check this http://annevankesteren.nl/archives/2004/08/xhtml for a much more useful explanation than mine :)
HTH
-
Manuel trabaja para Simplelógica: apariencia, experiencia y comunicación en la web.
http://simplelogica.net # (+34) 985 22 12 65
escribe en Logicola http://simplelogica.net/logicola/
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
