Posted by Chris Beall on 02/02/06 23:00

John Salerno wrote:

> Spartanicus wrote:
>
>> John Salerno <johnjsal@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a website that lists all XHTML tags and their descriptions,
>>> from W3C? I see the spec. document, but it doesn't get into the
>>> specifics of each tag.
>>
>>
>> XHTML 1.x is merely a reformulation of HTML4 into XML, so the XHTML 1.x
>> specs do not define the elements. Use the HTML 4.01 spec. for element
>> definitions, or better: use the real thing itself instead of playing
>> silly games with backslashes:
>> http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm
>>
>>> Is there anything like this for CSS as well?
>>
>>
>> CSS doesn't have tags or elements:
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
>>
>
> Aside from " />", is there any difference between HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0?
>
> But I guess one reason I've gone with XHTML is that it will eventually
> replace HTML. It won't be an alternate version, and it doesn't seem
> likely that there will be an HTML 5. I've never seen a problem with the
> /> tag yet, so just like there's no real reason to use XHTML, there
> doesn't seem to be much of a reason *not* to.

John,

See http://pages.prodigy.net/chris_beall/TC/XHTML.html.

And, if he's paying attention, Spartanicus will give you a pointer to
his more extensive discourse on the topic.

Chris Beall

[Back to original message]