, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> 2009/10/18 Tor Aqissiaq :
>> What is wrong with XHTML? Are you implying that HTML is superior?
>
> Only geeks bother to adopt it. XHTML adoption is around 0.1% of all
> web pages, and it is unlikely to take over the world. All browsers and
> the web trend
What is wrong with XHTML? Are you implying that HTML is superior?
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> 2009/10/18 Tor Aqissiaq :
>> XHTML, parsed using an XML parser is very specifically defined and
>> does not look different in different browsers, but f
Styles are well defined, and the only web browser I know of that has
ever had problems then is IE. Scripts are not relevent in a word
processing context.
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 10/18/09, Tor Aqissiaq wrote:
>> XHTML, parsed using an XML parse
XHTML, parsed using an XML parser is very specifically defined and
does not look different in different browsers, but few people serve
XHTML documents with the application/xhtml+xml headers, because IE
refuses to parse XML. XHTML parsed as HTML + no better than HTML. I
already use XHTML for sending
Hi,
I've just downloaded surf 0.2 and it is very fast, but I have two problems.
1. I can't download stuff anymore.
2. I can cut and paste using the mouse.
Have these features been completely removed?
Thanks.
