news and thoughts on and around the development
of the iCite net
by Jay Fienberg
posted: Jul 31, 2003 8:34:26 PM
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. (See my comments earlier this month on XHTML 2.0 in Mark's dips into XHTML.)
But, I hand code my blog entries in old fashioned transitional XHTML 1.0, and I think it is just dandy.
First of all, the main XHTML thing that I do is make sure my HTML is well-formed and valid, as well as use the XML style for empty elements, like <br /> rather than <br>.
Having done this by hand for a couple months (I first started specifically using XHTML when I started this blog), I actually find it harder to hand-code HTML 4 than XHTML 1.0. I find it is somewhat more efficient to be more strictly consistent (XHTML 1.0) than less so (a lot of pages in HTML 4.0).
The other thing that seems like it will be nice with my pages being XHTML is that I will be able to parse them with an XML parser. I have some ideas for why I might want to do this (i.e., with automated features for iCites), and it seems like a nice feature to have for the expense of not much more than closing my P tags.
Anyway, I think there could be positive value realized if general HTML usage shifted more into XHTML 1.0. I am not so sure where the positive value is (at least at this point) in XHTML 2.0.
permalink | comments {1} · trackbacks {1}
also available as: rss · rss2 · rdf · atom
trackback from: the iCite net development blog
posted: Aug 3, 2003 4:50:31 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
Email, the web and the contagious database
» next post
Russ' vacation to XML world
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 8:30:54 PM
"and it seems like a nice feature to have for the expense of not much more than closing my P tags."
XHTML advocates always say this... I don't get it...you can just as easily close your P tags in HTML...as for "automated features" like parsing a document: if you are closing your P tags and generally writing clean, valid HTML as it is, there should not be a problem.
I've tried several RSS-programs that have "auto-discover" features which parse documents looking for an XML feed to download...not one has failed me yet even though my site is written in HTML 4.01 Strict...
The coming "Age of XHTML" is a fairytale...a solution looking for a problem...there will never be a mainstream web browser released that strictly reads valid XHTML and spits out anything less for two reasons: #1: most sane people won't use a piece of software that doesn't work most of the time and #2: the additional overhead required for building in "loose" rendering (like the lack of closing P tags) is insignificant for desktop applications now that HDs are up to about 120 GB...
There may be a slight benefit for low-resource handheld devices, but by the time valid XHTML is everywhere the handheld devices will have more than enough onboard resources anyways...