Re: Convert HTML to XML

From:

Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.spamfilter@virtualinfinity.net>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:11:09 -0700

Message-ID:

<NvmdnZZGSaj4ir3anZ2dnUVZ_q-jnZ2d@wavecable.com>

Sherman Pendley wrote:

Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.spamfilter@virtualinfinity.net> writes:

Sherman Pendley wrote:

Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.spamfilter@virtualinfinity.net> writes:

Um, what are you talking about? XHTML *is* valid HTML.

Not at all. XHTML is an XML application. HTML is an SGML application. The
two are not the same. For instance, this is valid XHTML, but not valid HTML:

<img src="foo.jpg" />

Are you sure that's not valid HTML?

Certain. Look it up: <http://w3c.org>

That's a rather large site to look up the information that says <tag />
is invalid. How about pointing me to at least the right section, eh?

As an aside, I did find this interesting.
<http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/10/shorttags.html>
Apparently there are some shortcuts available to HTML users that aren't
for XML users. For example '<p<a href="/">Some Link</> some text' is
supposedly equivalent to <p><a href="/">Some Link</a> some text

It's called deprecation. Tell your users that they need the latest
browsers to see your site.

No. Why would I do such a stupid thing as that?

Same reason people don't write Java 1.2 code anymore. If you're content
is valuable enough, people will upgrade for it.

In other words, IE6 & IE7 don't see XHTML - they see HTML with a few funny
extra slashes here and there. That being the case, why not simply deliver
the HTML correctly, without the XHTML baggage to begin with?

Because you gain so much with using XHTML, including the fact that
many popular JavaScript libraries require XHTML-strict to work
properly.

Is that meant to be a joke?

Next you're going to tell me that you shouldn't use CSS.

Um - why would I tell you that?

sherm--

--
Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>