Thanks for your feedback. __ Raymond Irving --- On Tue, 4/14/09, Michael A. Peters <mpeters@xxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Michael A. Peters <mpeters@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Generate XHTML (HTML compatible) Code using DOMDocument > To: "Raymond Irving" <xwisdom@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: php-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 8:09 PM > Raymond Irving wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm thinking about using the html5 doctype for all > html documents since it's supported by all the popular > browsers available today. > > Two Quick questions... > > Why do we need to send XHTML code to a web browser > when standard html code (with html 5 doctype) will do just > fine? > > In most cases we don't. > However if we want to include extensions (such as MathML > etc.) then xhtml is the only way to do it. > > My own reason for sending xhtml is because I believe it to > be a superior specification and would like to see html > (where not all tags need to be closed) go away. > > Having valid x(ht)ml output also means that other software > that uses your web page as a source for data can just parse > it as xml to get the data it needs. > > Be careful with html 5 - use the fallbacks (IE embed or > object for video as a fallback to the video tag), because > not everyone uses the latest browsers. > > > > > Is there any advantage of using xhtml in the web > browser over html for normal web application development? > > > > In most cases, not a display advantage. > > HTML 1.1 supports the ruby tags/attribute, html 4 does not, > but with html 5 / xhtml 5 - they are supposedly identical in > spec with the only difference being the markup semantics of > xhtml 5 conform to xml standards. I suspect html 5 > elements/attributes are case insensitive (like they are for > previous html) but I haven't checked - xhtml tags/attributes > need to be lower case. > > But if your page can be properly displayed with valid html > then the only technical advantage I can think of for using > xhtml is for apps that use your page as a data source (so > they don't have to convert it to xml). > > I personally will send xhtml most of the time when I can > because I want HTML to go away, and as soon as 97% of > browsers properly support xhtml, I may stop sending html all > together. Since IE 8 still does not (not will correct mime > type anyway) it will be years before that happens. > > Oh - another advantage to xhtml - it's easy to extend for > your own use. > For example, you can add a custom attribute for your own > use (IE as hooks for other web apps on other sites to use > when grabbing data from your site, or whatever) and it will > validate as long as you properly declare it. With html, I > believe adding an attribute is not allowed unless you create > a whole new DTD. > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
