- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:40:25 -0700
- To: James Craig <work@cookiecrook.com>
- Cc: tina@greytower.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 09:37 AM, James Craig wrote: > I think the only accessibility difference between using valid HTML > versus valid XHTML is that XHTML conforms to standard well-formed XML > rules and could therefore be used and displayed by /any/ XML parser. > The "accessibility" benefit doesn't necessarily relate to people with > disabilities but instead just refers to "access for all". Such as what, though? XHTML also has the drawback that, if there is a single error, it will not display in any XHTML browser or XML parser. Note: If you have an XHTML document with an error -- say you forgot to close a tag -- and your browser displays it anyway, your browser is in VIOLATION of the XML standard. Any standards-compliant XHTML browser will reject invalid XML, if you declare your document as XHTML. HTML is more forgiving and thus more appropriate for general Web use. Why would you want to use XHTML in such a situation? --Kynn PS: Converting from valid HTML to valid XHTML (and thus being usable by any XML parser) is trivial. C.f. HTMLTidy. -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Author, CSS in 24 Hours http://cssin24hours.com Inland Anti-Empire Blog http://blog.kynn.com/iae Shock & Awe Blog http://blog.kynn.com/shock
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 16:34:58 UTC