|
|
Posted by Andy Dingley on 01/13/06 00:58
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:29:25 -0600, saz <saz1958@nospammersexcite.com>
wrote:
>HTML can be read by any browser currently in use, which is not true of
>XHTML.
Which browsers can't read Appendix C XHTML ? Given the tag soup that
browsers _must_ support to be vaguely usable on the web, I doubt there
is a single one.
Recommendations:
Don't use XHTML 1.1 or 2.0
If you do use XHTML, use Appendix C.
Use Strict (either one), because it keeps IE's CSS rendering models
under control. IMHO it's better to be slightly invalid (with <a
target="" > etc.) than to lose Strict in favour of valid Transitional.
Coding style depends on more than doctype. <font> will either be there
or it won't, depending on whether you use it. Using Transitional doesn't
make it compulsory!
There's also no reason why a site needs a consistent doctype. If it's
hard to do it on a particular page, change doctype.
XHTML is hard to generate from XSLT - if you're using Appendix C. You
may find HTML easier to keep valid. XHTML-as-XML (as generated by XSLT
with <xsl:output mode="xml" > ) is not a good choice for the web - it
certainly will cause problems.
As to which is better, HTML 4.01 vs. XHTML 1.0 / Appendix C, then there
just isn't anything clear to choose between them. If there was, then we
wouldn't need to argue over it.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|