W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > May 2005

XHTML 1.0 versus HTML 4.01

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 14:32:33 -0400
Message-Id: <93BF908D-6E54-4668-8006-D5D2C51ADFA2@w3.org>
To: "'public-evangelist@w3.org' w3. org" <public-evangelist@w3.org>

Le 05-05-06 à 16:22, Vincent François a écrit :
> What do you think about the idea of going back to HTML 4.01 because  
> XHTML 1.0 is delivered as text/html ?

You don't go back to something. You only choose the language which  
suits your need. There's nothing wrong in one or the other.

I encourage that you use Strict for XHTML 1.0 AND HTML 4.01

> Replace this
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
> with this

Plus all the mark-ups which are different.
     <br/> by <br> For example.

For example, Why I prefer to use XHTML 1.0 over HTML 4.01, in my  
personal case. Because for my workflow, I can just apply an XSLT on  
my XHTML 1.0 files to create an RSS feed, an automatic index of my  
Web pages, etc.
For me it's just practical. It's not forbidden to serve XHTML 1.0 as  
text/html. It is for XHTML 1.1

I'm about to definitely switch my *personal* Web site to application/ 
xhtml+xml, which might crash users of IE 6.0 Win. There are now many  
browsers supporting the mime type "application/xhtml+xml"

For IE7 Win, there's a request for application/xhtml+xml support on  
their wiki.

Dominique Hazaël-Massieux has written a guide for serving both

Just use correctly the language of your choice: be HTML 4.01, XHTML  
1.0 or XHTML 1.1. Don't make it for the beauty of it, but for what  
suits your needs and your workflow.


Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Sunday, 8 May 2005 18:32:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:19 UTC