On 28/10/05, Paula Unger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My understanding is that support for HTML will soon > > > disappear;
> > Whatever gave you that idea? > W3C. HTML 4.0 is the last planned version of HTML - after that all the > work is going into XHTML. Not creating new versions of a standard does not mean that support for old versions of a standard is going to go away any time soon. > Supporting XHTML doesn't mean you're not supporting HTML - XHTML is > just an evolution of HTML. Not entirely. > I think it's more significant that Mozilla is recommending "Strict" for HTML > than the > HTML itself. No, they recommend HTML 4.01. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html#accept "Serving valid HTML 4.01 as text/html ensures the widest browser and search engine support." > HTML permits sloppier coding - XHTML doesn't. No it doesn't. Some things which are required in XHTML are optional in HTML, but you still have to follow the standard. (And there is nothing that can be expressed in XHTML 1.0 that can't be expressed in HTML 4.01, ditto vice versa). > But the Strict DTD forces you to stop being sloppy. No. It stops you using a bunch of non-structural non-semantic elements and attributes. The choice between Strict and Transitional is entirely independent of that between HTML and XHTML. > But the point about moving towards XHTML is a bit irrelevant - why > would you want to hang on to HTML when you're going to be doing all > your styling with CSS? Because HTML is better supported, and becuase XHTML provides no benefits whatsoever while making it that much harder to conform to the standard. > Take out all the styling codes, remember to close tags, and write it all in > lowercase - > and you're already writing transitional XHTML. No, I'm not. I don't have "/" characters hanging about inside my empty element tags, I don't have namespace delarations, I don't have an XHTML Doctype, I don't have ambiguity about which element (<html> or <body>) is the outermost box on the canvas, I don't have to worry about using namespace aware DOM methods in JavaScript, I don't have to worry so much about which character encoding declaration takes precedence (HTTP header, Prolog, <meta>, default), I don't have to worry about using numeric character references for the benefit of non-validating parsers, etc, etc. -- David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk><http://blog.dorward.me.uk> ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
