Posted by Sherman Pendley on 11/04/07 21:46

Lars Eighner <usenet@larseighner.com> writes:

> In our last episode, <1194172361.049047.57070@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> the lovely and talented 1001 Webs broadcast on
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html:
>
>> W3 recommends the use of CSS for *presentation*
>> and XHTML for content,
>> Please, correct me if i'm wrong.
>
> You're wrong. That XHTML is more recent does not mean that it is more
> highly recommended than HTML 4.01.

Nor does it mean that HTML development has stopped. The W3C has openly stated
that inadequate browser support makes widespread adoption of XHTML problematic,
and revived the HTML Working Group back in March 2007.

<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/>

The goals of XHTML were worthwhile, and maybe if MS had cooperated with proper
support for it in IE, the results would have been different.

As it stands though, with IE's only "support" for XHTML being the fact that its
HTML parser can handle the extra slashes without choking too badly, XHTML has to
be regarded as an experiment that hasn't yet proven successful.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

[Back to original message]