Today's Posts Follow Us On Twitter! TFL Members on Twitter  
Forum search: Advanced Search  
Navigation
Marketplace
  Members Login:
Lost password?
  Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 24,254
Total Threads: 80,792
Total Posts: 566,471
There are 1394 users currently browsing (tf).
 
  Our Partners:
 
  TalkFreelance     Design and Development     HTML/XHTML/DHTML/CSS :

Why You Shouldn't Be Using XHTML

Thread title: Why You Shouldn't Be Using XHTML
Closed Thread  
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
    Thread tools Search this thread Display Modes  
10-11-2008, 08:14 PM
#11
Sam Granger is offline Sam Granger
Status: Request a custom title
Join date: Feb 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 2,616
iTrader: 19 / 88%
 

Sam Granger is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Sam Granger

  Old

Originally Posted by derek lapp View Post
i deal with xml/xsl, so xhtml is a requirement.


Same here

10-16-2008, 02:28 PM
#12
bluecirclemedia is offline bluecirclemedia
Status: I'm new around here
Join date: Oct 2008
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 2
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

bluecirclemedia is on a distinguished road

  Old

Sometimes I need it, sometimes I don't. But I always use it because if it's compliant, there's no need NOT to use is. Does that make sense? It's early here, I just woke up haha.

10-16-2008, 04:56 PM
#13
bgolat is offline bgolat
Status: I love this place
Join date: Mar 2005
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 714
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

bgolat is on a distinguished road

Send a message via ICQ to bgolat Send a message via AIM to bgolat Send a message via Yahoo to bgolat

  Old


XHTML is based off of XML syntax, while HTML is based off of SGML syntax.
then you write:


The HTML 5 Specification is being developed with XML features, when it debuts, XHTML will no longer serve a purpose, even to those who use it properly.
So, isn't it beneficial to understand XHTML if that is true that HTML5 will have xml features? Even if a HTML 5 comes out today, it will take multiple years before it would be fully adapted.

10-22-2008, 03:07 PM
#14
Sandfighter is offline Sandfighter
Sandfighter's Avatar
Status: I'm new around here
Join date: Oct 2008
Location: Blackwood, UK
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 15
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Sandfighter is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Sandfighter Send a message via Skype™ to Sandfighter

  Old

For me XHTML is just a next step in the evolution - thanks to CSS we can do things that guys few years back could just imagine. I am definitely NOT against XHTML, cause if everybody could design using Dreamweaver only we would be stuck in the Internet Ice Age... Where are we now? CSS3 is coming, Firefox 3 already recognizes it and we can just update our knowledge and do few steps forward!

10-24-2008, 02:07 AM
#15
rochow is offline rochow
rochow's Avatar
Status: Member
Join date: Oct 2006
Location: Australia
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 297
iTrader: 4 / 100%
 

rochow is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to rochow Send a message via Skype™ to rochow

  Old

Nice plug

Originally Posted by Normo View Post
I agree with Vizon. XHTML is more reliable. If you are unstructured about how you layout your markup it's bad form and leads to more time of bug fixes etc. Coding to a stricter syntax and form will increase your productivity and as you continue to develop as a programmer neater markup will help you develop your skills not to mention allowing you to come back to a piece of work and to be able to quickly recognise what you are looking at, process it etc.

XHTML is a good universal standard that means developers can interchange code without having to spend more time to process the badly written markup.

But each to their own I guess.
Not 1 thing you said is correct.

More reliable? False.
Stricter? False.
Better written? False.

XHTML is more reliable? Oh really, so my HTML is just going to one day just magically stop working while XHTML continues to keep working? Hardly.

Stricter syntax? No, different, not stricter.

Badly written markup? So if it's XHTML it's written well, and if it's HTML its therefore written bad? Please.

But hey, someones gotta live in fairyland.

10-24-2008, 05:20 PM
#16
ditch182 is offline ditch182
Status: Junior Member
Join date: Jul 2008
Location: NC
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 70
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

ditch182 is on a distinguished road

  Old

I feel like you have to think about it from a web services standpoint as well. If XML continues to be the de facto standard for web services, then XHTML is a must. Especially for sites that can take advantage of RESTful services.

11-12-2008, 07:42 AM
#17
trinitybrown is offline trinitybrown
Status: I'm new around here
Join date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 20
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

trinitybrown is on a distinguished road

  Old

It's really a good article , thanks for sharing it here

11-12-2008, 09:34 AM
#18
Normo is offline Normo
Normo's Avatar
Status: Member
Join date: Aug 2008
Location: Hampshire, UK
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 202
iTrader: 1 / 100%
 

Normo is on a distinguished road

  Old

Originally Posted by rochow View Post
Nice plug



Not 1 thing you said is correct.

More reliable? False.
Stricter? False.
Better written? False.

XHTML is more reliable? Oh really, so my HTML is just going to one day just magically stop working while XHTML continues to keep working? Hardly.

Stricter syntax? No, different, not stricter.

Badly written markup? So if it's XHTML it's written well, and if it's HTML its therefore written bad? Please.

But hey, someones gotta live in fairyland.
I'll let good old W3C say what I am trying to
Originally Posted by W3C
Why is XHTML needed? Isn't HTML good enough?
HTML is probably the most successful document markup language in the world. But when XML was introduced, a two-day workshop was organised to discuss whether a new version of HTML in XML was needed. The opinion at the workshop was a clear 'Yes': with an XML-based HTML other XML languages could include bits of XHTML, and XHTML documents could include bits of other markup languages. We could also take advantage of the redesign to clean up some of the more untidy parts of HTML, and add some new needed functionality, like better forms.

What are the advantages of using XHTML rather than HTML?
If your document is just pure XHTML 1.0 (not including other markup languages) then you will not yet notice much difference. However as more and more XML tools become available, such as XSLT for tranforming documents, you will start noticing the advantages of using XHTML. XForms for instance will allow you to edit XHTML documents (or any other sort of XML document) in simple controllable ways. Semantic Web applications will be able to take advantage of XHTML documents.

If your document is more than XHTML 1.0, for instance including MathML, SMIL, or SVG, then the advantages are immediate: you can't do that sort of thing with HTML.

Can I just put the XML declaration on top of existing HTML documents? Can I intermix HTML 4.01 and XHTML documents?
No. HTML is not in XML format. You have to make the changes necessary to make the document proper XML before you can get it accepted as XML.


Why are browsers so fussy about XML? They were more accepting with HTML.
This is deliberate. HTML browsers accept any input, correct or incorrect, and try to make something sensible of it. This error-correction makes browsers very hard to write, especially if all browsers are expected to do the same thing. It has also meant that huge numbers of HTML documents are incorrect, because since they display OK in the browser, the author isn't aware of the errors. This makes it incredibly difficult to write new web user agents since documents claiming to be HTML are often so poor.

Why should I care if my document is in correct HTML? It displays all right on my browser.
All browsers know how to deal with correct HTML. However, if it is incorrect, the browser has to repair the document, and since not all browsers repair documents in the same way, this introduces differences, so that your document may look and work differently on different browsers. Since there are hundreds of different browsers, and more coming all the time (not only on PCs, but also on PDAs, mobile phones, televisions, printers, even refrigerators), it is impossible to test your document on every browser. If you use incorrect HTML and your document doesn't work on a particular browser, it is your fault; if you use correct HTML and it doesn't work, it is a bug in the browser.
Source

11-13-2008, 09:20 AM
#19
richiejenkins is offline richiejenkins
richiejenkins's Avatar
Status: Junior Member
Join date: Aug 2007
Location: Harrogate, England
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 84
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

richiejenkins is on a distinguished road

  Old

Great Read

11-13-2008, 09:15 PM
#20
rochow is offline rochow
rochow's Avatar
Status: Member
Join date: Oct 2006
Location: Australia
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 297
iTrader: 4 / 100%
 

rochow is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to rochow Send a message via Skype™ to rochow

  Old

That doesn't have to do with reliability, strictness or how well its written. XHTML isn't better, XHTML is just different. Actually using XHTML for all browsers is a LONG way off (heck, I'll probably be out of this before IE6 is, that POS is a battler)

Closed Thread  
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

  Posting Rules  
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump:
 
  Contains New Posts Forum Contains New Posts   Contains No New Posts Forum Contains No New Posts   A Closed Forum Forum is Closed