HTH wrote: >...server has to do content negotiation in order to send >text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and >application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means >you're generating two copies of all of your content Assuming your are not writing static pages, you only need to generate one copy of content in XHTML 1.1 format and then serve it as any version of HTML as you like.
HTH wrote: > Furthermore, content negotiation itself is some work to > get done correctly At most, maybe 10 lines of code. Please see: http://xhtml.com/en/content-negotiation/ Simon wrote: >Does anyone use XHTML 1.1 and does it provide any benefits? The benefits are on the content production side. If you author your content in XHTML, you can parse it with an off-the-shelf XML parser and make modifications to your content en-masse. This gives you control over your content. Regards, -Vlad http://xstandard.com XStandard XHTML (Strict or 1.1) WYSIWYG Editor -------- Original Message -------- From: Nikita The Spider The Spider Date: 2008-05-12 8:36 PM > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Does anyone use XHTML 1.1 > > Of the doctypes that my validator Nikita saw in one sample period, > just slightly over 2% were XHTML 1.1. It's worth noting that most, if > not all, were sent with the wrong media type. > > http://NikitaTheSpider.com/articles/ByTheNumbers/#doctypes > >> and does it provide any benefits? > > Well, compared to what? HTML 4.01 Strict, XHTML 1.0 Transitional or > XHTML 1.0 Strict? > >> Is there a reason why not many sites adopt this Doctype and is there any >> point using right now if your site is 1.0 Strict? > > One big impediment to using XHTML 1.1 is that it must be sent with the > application/xhtml+xml media type which makes IE6 choke. That implies > that the server has to do content negotiation in order to send > text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and > application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means you're > generating two copies of all of your content unless you're willing to > refuse IE users. Does this sound appealing yet? > > Furthermore, content negotiation itself is some work to get done > correctly, even ignoring the cost of generating both two versions of > one's content. > > Given the extra work required to support XHTML 1.1, there would have > to be some pretty darn compelling reasons to use it, and those reasons > just aren't there for most people. There's quite enough people who > question the use of XHTML 1.0 over HTML (I'm one of them), let alone > XHTML 1.1. > > About XHTML and media types: > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/#summary > > HTH > > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
