HTML vs xhtml?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

I learned xhtml within the last couple of years, as I was told that was
"where the web is going" - well, at least on the intranet I was working on.

I've occasionally seen comments here that suggest that xhtml is not the
way to go, and I'm wondering why?  It's not that much different than
HTML, and my understanding that its requirements to close tags, for
instance, helps it work better with css than HTML does... also (could be
very wrong here) I thought it helps if one wants to eventually use xml
(which I know little about.  Should I learn?).

Does anyone out there in the real world actually use xhtml?  Why, or why


Re: HTML vs xhtml?

jmc wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
I think the main reason why not to many web designers use XHTML is due
to the fact that you need to serve it as text/html. For IE users.
Also, browsers that support XHTML don't support it properly yet.
But, I think it will have great potencial.
I believe XHTML is also good though for items such as RSS feeds etc
etc, although that's more XML. Their is also XSLT, which is an
alternative for Styleing docs, (I think), but I don't know much about
Anyway, I hope that helps a bit.
Regards Chad.

Re: HTML vs xhtml?

Chaddy2222 wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Loosely, XML for data, XSL is a stylesheeting language for XML
documents, XSLT translates XML into other formats, XSL-FO is formating
language that uses XSL styles. These are the ones you are more likely to
come across.

XHTML, again loosely, is HTML that fits within the XML way of doing
things; properly completed code that has to be more strictly written,
resulting in fewer browser errors, easier to read code -- and more
important (possibly) easier to translate into other formats; It's easier
to take an XHTML document and XSLT it into a PDF document than to do it
with vanilla HTML.

We tend to use XHTML now because it's easier to read, easier to correct
and (at least when it comes to our intranet) easier to turn into
printable documents/distributable, such as PDF.



x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
# this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2006
# explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
# to duplicate this post.

Re: HTML vs xhtml?

SpaceGirl wrote

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I used to have a Cortina GXL.

Charles Sweeney

Re: HTML vs xhtml?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I had one, but didnt get on with it. PX'd it for a VX2300, which was
actually immesurably worse

Re: HTML vs xhtml?


Be prepared for replies like 'This has been discussed here to death, don't
start another thread.' In fact such a statement can be considered to be
part of my reply ;)

jmc wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I do agree that the future is XHTML. I don't think the future is already
there. No further arguments, search the archive of this NG, alt.html or
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html for indepth discussions.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not, if your HTML is valid.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

If you want to use XML processing tools on the server side, XHTML *seems* to
be easier as the final output format. But as long as you have to serve it
as text/html (as long as IE8 - or whichever version will introduce XHTML
support - does not dominate the IE population), you have to make sure that
the XHTML will conform to appendix C of the XHTML 1.0 specification - and
generic XML processing tools don't now this, so you need some module with
XHTML knowledge. A similar module, which outputs HTML isn't much more
difficult to implement, so there's not really a need for XHTML, if you want
to use XML on the server-side (this is how I'm currently building dynamic
documents on my sites).

Quoted text here. Click to load it

XHTML *is* XML, so you *have* to learn at least the basics, if you want to
create wellformed XHTML.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, on the server-side.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not again this question ;)

Benjamin Niemann
Email: pink at odahoda dot de
WWW: /

Re: HTML vs xhtml?

jmc wrote :
Quoted text here. Click to load it

     *  Say No to XHTML an excellent article from Spartanicus
     * Beware of XHTML by David Hammond
     * Sending XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful by Ian Hickson
     * XHTML's Dirty Little Secret by Mark Pilgrim
     * XHTML Is Dead by Tommy Olsson
     * XHTML - What's the Point? by Henri Sivonen /

remove blah to email me

Re: HTML vs xhtml?

The general idea behind xml is to bring the content back to a tighter
standard. This way you can produce a document with another type of software
like Microsoft Word or a Spreadsheet or even a script in a database and save
the content as XML. Then this XML file can be used for input into a program
and easily create XHTML content.

Make publishing to a website pretty slick.

Site Timeline