news and thoughts on and around the development
of the iCite net
by Jay Fienberg
posted: Jul 6, 2003 6:52:50 PM
On his blog, Mark Pilgrim mentioned his latest article on XML.com, The Vanishing Image: XHTML 2 Migration Issues.
I liked Mark's article, and also discovered and liked his previous article on XHTML, All That We Can Leave Behind.
Mark also links to Evan Goer's good Exploring XHTML 2 (which now has a part 2 as well).
To be honest, XHTML 2.0 kind-of makes my mind go numb at this point. I mean, XHTML 1 makes sense to me as: take HTML and require it to be well formed XML, maybe add a little namespace support. That alone seems like it would be major / revolutionary. I guess I am getting old or dumber or something.
permalink | comments {1} · trackbacks {2}
also available as: rss · rss2 · rdf · atom
trackback from: the iCite net development blog
posted: Jul 31, 2003 8:38:10 PM
title: XHTML the way mom used to make it
Don Park is commenting on the techno-too-complicatedness of XHTML in his XHTML: Technical Masturbation. I would definitely agree with a lot of what Don is saying when it comes to XHTML 2.0.
trackback from: the iCite net development blog
posted: Aug 3, 2003 4:51:02 PM
title: To X or not to X HTML, that could always be a fine question
MikeyC left some good comments on my posts about XHTML. What follows are my responses to his comments.
Note: All comments and trackbacks are moderated. Spam is deleted. Other comments are approved as promptly as possible.
Note: Older posts no longer accept new comments or trackbacks.
« prev post
David reveals blojsom already has necho support
» next post
RSS Schedulin' your idea
blog archive
2006: jan · feb · mar · apr may · jun · jul · aug sep · oct · nov · dec 2005: jan · feb · mar · apr may · jun · jul · aug sep · oct · nov · dec 2004: jan · feb · mar · apr may · jun · jul · aug sep · oct · nov · dec 2003: may · jun · jul · aug sep · oct · nov · dec first post: April 30, 2003 highlight views: Spammers' Choice
Jay elsewhere online
Jay Fienberg - the official home page
Wrong Notes - the music blog of the Ear Reverends
Fine & Full, aka, a fine and full burger
Sociomobilepoetextologia (moblog, currently inactive due to lack of proper mobile)
to enjoy roll
sites I like to read when I start from here
· Anastasia Fuller
· Andy Baio
· Biz Stone
· Boris Mann
· Bre Pettis
· Chris Dent
· Danny Ayers
· Dare Obasanjo
· David Czarnecki
· David Weinberger
· Don Park
· Evan Williams
· Greg Narain
· Jason Kottke
· Jim Benson
· Lucas Gonze
· Marc Canter
· Matt May
· Matt Mullenweg
· Michal Migurski
· Nancy White
· Rebecca Blood
· Reg Cheramy
· Richard MacManus
· Sam Ruby
· Shelley Powers
· Tim Bray
· danah boyd
Comment by: MikeyC · http://www.zeit.ca/
posted: Aug 2, 2003 8:35:34 PM
"I mean, XHTML 1 makes sense to me as: take HTML and require it to be well formed XML, maybe add a little namespace support."
We need an entirely new spec to force people to write valid code? If people aren't writing valid HTML who says they are going to start writing valid XHTML? No company in their right mind is going to release a browser that doesn't suck down tag soup so those who write sloppy code will continue to do so...as for namespace support: why exactly couldn't they have just bolted it onto HTML? I have yet to hear a verifiable real world reason why XHTML is in any way better than clean, valid HTML.