W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2003

Re: Need feedback for a XHTML Tutorial

From: J. King <mtknight@dark-phantasy.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 03:20:47 -0400
To: HTML list <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <oprtvv0xcnk4suho@mail.dark-phantasy.com>

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:15:59 +0930, Damien Bezborodow 
<drbezborodow@webpathways.com> wrote:

> Hello ladies and gents...
>
> I have just completed a short article introducing the basics of XHTML and 
> how it relates/differs to HTML 4.01. I am seeking feedback from anybody 
> interested relating to whether I have my facts straight, the correctness 
> of my points, any mistakes, anything I forgot to mention that needs 
> mentioning, and anything else.

Making notes as I read through:
1. Use the <abbr> element (or perhaps <accronym> for compatiblity, even if 
it is wrong in these cases) for the first occurences of things like "W3C" 
"XHTML", "XML", etc.
2. Under "Advantages of XHTML", you have a typographical error at the end 
of the first sentence--just in case you don't catch it somewhere down the 
road.
3. The usage notes for "it's" [1] may be of interest to you.  This is a 
somewhat minor point, as most people probably won't mind, but sticklers 
like me are likely to be irritated if not outright offended by incorrect 
usage.
4. Advantages of XHTML: You may want to note that error-correction still 
occurs in user gents if malformed XHTML data is sent with a content type of 
text/html.  You may also want to note that this content type is not allowed 
for XHTML 1.1 and onward.  Explanation of the different XHTML content types 
probably isn't within the purview of the document, but maybe you could 
write a short note on the matter.
5. Advantages of XHTML: XHTML isn't really new technology anymore.  
Compared to HTML, certainly, but it's not as new as it used to be.  It 
should be emphasised that modern agents have no trouble at all with XHTML 
syntax and can indeed display XHTML as XML data, for the most part.
6. XHTML Basic: Your <img> example is not valid, as it has no alt="" 
attribute.
7. Conluding Basics: Apart from that typo, you neglected to mention that 
name="" is still used for form elements and <meta> elements.
8. You should encourage the use of UTF-8 character encoding right before 
"Language Attributes", as Unicode is (as I recall) the native encoding of 
XHTML.
9. It should be noted that lang="" is only in XHTML 1.0 for compatibility 
reasons and has been removed from XHTML 1.1.
10. The document should be dated.  At the very least, add a <meta> in the 
header containing the date of publication, but a date clearly visible is 
best.  This information is likely to be at least partially out of date in 
two years' time, and you don't want to give the impression that it's 
current when it's not.


Second look-over:
1. Advantages of XHTML: It's not necessarily true that conforming documents 
will work on all machines.  It is, however, much more -likely-.
2. Advantages of XHTML: "...are hoplessly formed HTML code..." That should 
be MALformed.
3. XMLNS Attribute: The XHTML namespace is -required-as per the conformance 
definition in the XHTML 1.0 spec [2].
4. Strict DTD: Not all presentational attributes are removed in the Strict 
document type, but the vast majority of them are.  There are still a few 
presentational elements in XHTML 1.1, though they've more or less be 
eradicated from XHTML 2.0.
5. alt and ttitle: Your example is not a closed element.  Just add in the 
trailing /.

That's all I could see for now.


[1] http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=it%27s
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#docconf


-- 
J. King
mtknight@dark-phantasy.com
http://dark-phantasy.com/
http://snap.dark-phantasy.com/
Received on Thursday, 14 August 2003 03:20:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:40:10 UTC