[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >James G Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>................ >> For many applications, you are correct. However, some situations >> require support of the most basic systems. >> >> Part of the problem with XHTML is that it is a page description >> language instead of a semantic markup language. We need to be able >> to support both screen displays as well as handhelds, phones, etc., >> that might not be able to use all the stuff we want in the richer >> screen media. Part of the other problem is that people writing with >> XHTML will try to make the page appear as they want instead of >> letting the stylesheet do it for them -- all the management in the >> world can't change government workers. >> >> The other thing I was trying to avoid was drastic changes in markup >> when there hasn't been a significant change in the semantics. Forms >> come to mind for this. XHTML form elements are too closely tied to >> presentation and not closely enough to the semantics. >> ..................... > >I am slowly moving my applications to XHTML. I did meet difficulties >where a simply template tag in TT, H:T and Mason would be very hard to >implement in XHTML. For example, the HTML form tags. >Even <input...> would not be easy, not to mention <select...> --- just as >in your exmaple. But finally, it looks I can always found a solution >when I learned more about it. On the other hand, all these difficulties >we are talking about exist in Java servlet too. My personal experience is >that XHTML provides a larger set of variation than H:T, but less than TT. >I understand that most existing applications need not be moved to >XHTM --- which will be a huge job and the benifit gained would be little >--- and my own major applications are still on top of H:T. But >I like to experience a little more new things. Since we are here >talking about PR of mod_perl, I'd like to propose the idea and >to get you people's ideas.
I'm not sure I understand how XHTML can replace TT, H::T, or Mason. Could you provide an example? My understanding is that XHTML is just an XML-ized version of HTML, so it retains all the form controls from HTML; an <input> tag in HTML is just an <input/> element in XHTML. >>We also can't depend on customers having modern browsers (and >>sometimes fear that they do, in the case of IE 6). We have customers >>all over the globe that must be able to manage their account >>information. This also means that we don't use any scripting except >>to make things easier -- everything has to work without scripting on >>the client side. > >This is correct. But again, I think this could also be a reason why >we prepare our page in two set of data: a XHTML template and >dynamically-generated XML data. We can serve more XML based clients >in the future. I'm not sure I understand the reason for preparing a duplicate set when one is sufficient. -- James Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 979-862-3725 Texas A&M CIS Operating Systems Group, Unix -- Report problems: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html List etiquette: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/email-etiquette.html
