W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > May 2009

Re: Validation

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 07:42:05 +0100
Message-ID: <4A16493D.1090303@googlemail.com>
To: RYAN CLARK <st1009254@craven-college.ac.uk>
CC: www-validator@w3.org
On 21/5/09 11:48, RYAN CLARK wrote:
> Are you aware that your w3c.org site that is supposed to set the
> guidelines does not follow them itself? It is coded to be compliant with
> xhtml 1.0 but not to the current standard of xhtml 1.1.

What W3C guideline says web authors must use one standard (XHTML 1.1) 
rather than another standard (XHTML 1.0), regardless of their technical 
needs (such as text/html compatibility)?

On the contrary, the W3C XHTML FAQ suggests some technical advantages of 
XHTML but makes it clear that if you want compatibility with "legacy 
browsers" you need to stick with XHTML 1.0:

"XHTML 1.0 was carefully designed so that with care it would also work 
on legacy HTML user agents as well."

"XHTML 1.1 is pure XML, and only intended to be XML. It cannot reliably 
be sent to legacy browsers."

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#need

By not using XHTML 1.1 to exclude the majority of web users (who are 
using browsers that don't support XHTML served as XML), W3C is setting a 
good example of choosing a standard that fits their actual requirements, 
that is, communicating with and servicing a broad audience.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 06:42:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:35 GMT