Steve Olive wrote:
:-) pony below
I guess it's just a matter of trying to keep up the good ideals and
getting more designers on board with XHTML served as XHTML & HTML.
I'm actually surprised how many tutorials I see that use HTML 4.01 in
computer magazines in 2006. If we can't convince these people to
code to XHTML 1.0 Transitional standards we have real problems.
I agree. Depending on the job I use Transitional or Strict.
I tend to recommend XHTML 1.0 Strict to others though, and that they at
least _test it_ by serving it as xhtml, so they will avoid nasty
surprises in the future.
Generally I don't have a problem with the use of Strict, valid and
complete HTML 4.01. It is the latest HTML standard, and can easily be
converted to its XHTML 1.0 counterpart.
Myself, I prefer to hone my skills on working xhtml now, which means I
can just do a bit of "mime-jumping" when the time comes that all the
major browsers are able to handle "application/xhtml+xml".
Some say the MSIE team might get version 8 up to the task - in a few
years time.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
