- From: Michel Fortin <michel.fortin@michelf.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 07:18:02 -0500
Le 1 d?c. 2006 ? 17:45, Ian Hickson a ?crit : > You don't need to do one or the other. It's just up to you which > you do. > Neither is better or worse than the other. They are equivalent, > neither is > deprecated, they are both unambiguous, they are both strict, they will > both have validators and they will both have tools that can be used to > process them. There's no reason to try and do both. I disagree with this choice-of-tool argument. If you develop software to be used by other people, or other programs, you don't want to lock them in either camp, so you have to provide a way to generate both outputs. That's especially important when programs and libraries are exchanging documents or snippets of documents between each other. The DOM is a poor choice for these exchanges, because different DOM implementation are not interoperable between each other. The markup on the other hand can move more freely. Having two markups pose the same problem as having two incompatible HD DVD formats. Browsers do (or will) accept both formats, so as long as the media type is known it'll work fine for them. But what about every other piece of software in the middle that does not talk directly to the browser? That's the real difficulty when dealing with HTML and XHTML: the choice isn't really about tools, it's a choice between two incompatible exchange format. That's the reason why I think it's compelling to have a common subset between HTML and XHTML. If you can output something valid for both HTML and XHTML at the same time, then you don't have to worry about what format is supported on the other end. That's also why it's probably worth knowing what the common subset looks like, how people might be tempted to use it, and what are its exact limitations and pitfalls. The common subset is an integral part of the the HTML/XHTML couple; it may be just a side effect, but it's there and should not be ignored. It's pretty clear to me that it'll be used whether we want it or not. Oh, and here is one last remark. There are really *two* important common subsets: one between conformant HTML and conformant XHTML, and another between unambiguous HTML and well-formed XHTML. The first was pretty irrelevant before HTML allowed "/>", but it did not prevent people from using the second. Michel Fortin michel.fortin at michelf.com http://www.michelf.com/
Received on Saturday, 2 December 2006 04:18:02 UTC