- From: Michael <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 00:09:15 +0900
Elliotte Harold <elharo at metalab.unc.edu>, 2007-03-07 09:12 -0500: > Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > > >Interesting, but not of much use. If an author really wants to support > >MSIE, she needs to not only ensure that MSIE tries to render the document > >at all by setting its MIME type to text/html, but also to not use anything > >XHTML-specific that isn't possible in HTML, e.g. <p> inside <li>, or > >inline SVG. And if one isn't going to use these features anyway, there is > >no reason to prefer XHTML over HTML other than following the fashion. > > Documents on the web aren't just about browsers, and certainly not just > about IE. There are many interesting things you can do with XHTML > documents you can't do with non-well-formed HTML documents. Personally > I'm most enamored of using XSLT to process them. However, the biggest > benefit for most developers is likely to be the simpler, cleaner, more > reliable DOM you get with a well-formed document. If you can go to valid > strict XHTML, the benefits get even larger. > > If your primary experience with HTML is displaying it in a browser, this > may not be apparent; but for those of us who have to write code to > process this stuff well-formedness and simplicity are major advantages. Amen. It's really amusing to see people continuing to trot out matter-of-fact statements dismissing XHTML. Those statements seem to fall into two basic types that can be paraphrased as either: - The only people who author documents in XHTML are naive developers/designers who do it just because they have been mislead into thinking that it's the cool/right thing to do. - The only people who user/serve-up XHTML are pedants who are out of touch with browser/implementation realities. It seems to me that those who make such statements either: - are unaware of any useful things that can be done with documents other than just displaying them in browsers -- or about how having those as well-formed XML can potentially make it easier to process them - have an agenda that makes them (consciously or unconsciously) want to dissuade others from using XHTML/XML (and XSLT, etc.) and to instead use alternatives (whatever alternatives they happen to personally be promoting) I don't think anybody can find fault with developers who speak from experience and say they don't personally use/serve-up XHTML because for their specific needs they see no value in doing so. But that's a whole different thing than making matter-of-fact blanket/wholesale dismissals of XHTML -- statements that imply that no other sane/hip developer could potentially find value in use of XHTML. --Mike -- Michael(tm) Smith http://people.w3.org/mike/
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2007 07:09:15 UTC