Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Are we really serving XHTML?

  • 26-08-2008 6:05pm
    #1
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 9,035 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    Just been reading an interesting thread on Sitepoint.com. To sum up the thread discusses whether someone should use HTML or XHTML. The interesting thing about it is we are all probably using html whether we like it or not.

    XHTML must be served as content type "application/xhtml+xml" by the server. If it is not then all browsers see it as html or should I say parse it as html. The big thing about this is IE does not recognize that content type. IE7 doesn't and IE8 probably won't. Configure your server to serve it as xhtml or use your php or .net to do so and IE will ask you if you want to download it???

    I will readily admit I jumped on the xhtml banwagon long ago and was a serious advocate in the office. If there was an xhtml 1.9 uber-strict type I wanted to try and make my pages conform to it. Reading that thread and subsequently the XHTML vs HTML FAQ I'm wondering what is the point.

    I do think the whole push for xhtml had a side benefit making people aware of writing well formed html, moving away from tables for layout and so on. I don't think it would have worked as well without the xhtml banner to drive it.

    Another thing mentioned is that the transitional type is not recommended
    For 'future-proofing' your documents, using a Strict doctype is more important than whether you use XHTML or HTML.

    I'd bet most people's sites are of the transitional type. Again this is just one guys opinion but he seems to know his stuff and it makes alot of sense.

    Anyway I'm just wondering if maybe html 4.01 strict using the same well formed html ethos as xhtml would be more appropriate in general since what xhtml really is, the benefits it's supposed to add to our documents isn't there anyway. I write alot of javascript and always use document.createElement for example. It's not supposed to work in xhtml. You are supposed to use document.createElementNS. So what is the point to it all?


Comments

  • #2
    p
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭p


    I've read tons about it and come to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter. We just have to live with the fact that this generation of HTML is not going to truly strick XHTML.

    If you want to be really picky, you'd be better off just making your sites HTML 4 and be done with it. :)


  • #3
    Eoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,263 ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    musician wrote: »
    I do think the whole push for xhtml had a side benefit making people aware of writing well formed html, moving away from tables for layout and so on. I don't think it would have worked as well without the xhtml banner to drive it.

    In so far as people who pushed for XHTML are more likely to push for CSS based layout?


  • #4
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 9,035 Mod ✭✭✭✭mewso


    eoin_s wrote: »
    In so far as people who pushed for XHTML are more likely to push for CSS based layout?

    No in so far as people who had no idea about layout were/are more likely to learn the recommended way (semantic way) if they listen to the xhtml/standards people. I think anyone who is interested in design even development will probably learn these things independent of any fad.


  • #5
    Eoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,263 ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    musician wrote: »
    No in so far as people who had no idea about layout were/are more likely to learn the recommended way (semantic way) if they listen to the xhtml/standards people. I think anyone who is interested in design even development will probably learn these things independent of any fad.

    That's pretty much what I meant to say - i.e. it's a cultural rather than technical shift from table based layout.


Advertisement