- From: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:51:50 +1000
- 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