Could be technical if you want to allow your pages to be parsed with XML 
parsers. I've done that in the past because I made some software to fetch data 
from my site.

-Thom



From: Andrew Maben 
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:14 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
Subject: Re: [WSG] transitional vs. strict


On Apr 30, 2008, at 9:59 AM, Joseph Taylor wrote:


  stick with HTML 4.01 Strict while the work is completed on (X)HTML5



IMHO (and given the depth and breadth of the replies to my original post I'm 
feeling very humble right now, as well as extremely grateful to you all) -  I 
do think that given the current state of the art this is the best approach, at 
least for me. But, indeed, let's not get into XHTML vs. HTML - I understand and 
respect the XHTML proponents' viewpoint, but in the end isn't it a choice based 
on personal taste?


Andrew










*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
******************************************************************* 

*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************

Reply via email to