W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2007

Re: supporting both formats html5 & xhtml5 re: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#xhtml5

From: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:51:50 +1000
Message-ID: <5f37426b0712212351q5c3b604cue162ee8b093a2970@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Preston L. Bannister" <preston@bannister.us>
Cc: "Dean Edridge" <dean@55.co.nz>, ryan <ryan@theryanking.com>, "Shawn Medero" <soypunk@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org

On Dec 21, 2007 10:36 PM, Preston L. Bannister <preston@bannister.us> wrote:
> The advantage to XHTML lies in server-side XML-based processing pipelines,
> not in the browser.  Once you come to that realization, then you have to ask
> whether a server-side rendering to HTML is in fact the more optimal choice.

An interesting point, but I think this is highly dependent on whether
you are publishing information primarily for browsers. Personally I
like a combination of atom and html, both generated from a single
source of data (for which I prefer XML). HTML is for the browsers,
atom for feed readers and other (potential) consumers/aggregators. I
use XHTML within Atom (personal preference to avoid CDATA where I
can).

I do agree: "the advantage to XHTML lies in server-side XML-based
processing pipelines"

I don't specifically need browsers to support XHTML - I certainly
don't need the specification to mandate any compliance. When I stop to
think about it, browser support for XML+XSLT (including HTML output)
would be more valuable (to me) than XHTML support. One day, if/when it
is well established in UAs and AT. Until then, it seems beyond the
scope of this WG but an interesting topic ~:)

cheers
Ben
Received on Saturday, 22 December 2007 07:51:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:51 UTC