HTML 4.0 or XHTML 1.0?

**Rizal** · Jul 20, 2003 23:02

I'm not sure whether this has been asked before, but here goes.

To ensure current and future compatibility, which one should I use, and why?

**Dan Grossman** · Jul 20, 2003 23:33

If coded PROPERLY, both of them will be compatible for many years to come. None of the browser makers have any intention of dropping HTML4 support any time in the foreseeable future.

If you're going the XHTML route, remember that you're going to need to separate your structure from your design as completely as possible. This means full use of CSS for layout of your page and as few tables as possible. XHTML is both backwards and forwards compatible -- it'll render on current and past browsers, but you're not going to have the same presentation on 4x generation and older (to most people, this means Netscape 4.x) browsers. They'll get the content, but likely not the design. The advantage to XHTML is easier updating, and if validly written, compatibility with most current and future browsers, phones, PDAs, and accessibility such as screen readers. Writing valid XHTML will also make it much reader to reach those accessibility guidelines becoming law in many countries. Another huge advantage is in bandwidth -- the average XHTML1.0/CSS page (like SitePoint's site, specifically outside of the forums) is much lighter than an HTML4 page because all you get is the content, not the formatting. The stylesheet only has to be downloaded once. Speaking of that, don't forget you can change the entire look and feel of your site, the entire design, just by editing your stylesheets.

If you need it to look pixel perfect in older browsers without the CSS support a true XHTML/CSS page requires, go with HTML 4. Like I said above, you still need to code it properly, and browsers won't stop supporting this in the future as long as you make proper use of the DOCTYPE tag. You can figure out the drawbacks by reading the advantages of XHTML.

If you're interested in the XHTML/CSS route and want some extra help, I recommend the book "Designing with Web Standards" (much over SP's book).

Good luck

**quenting** · Jul 20, 2003 23:48

This means full use of CSS for layout of your page and as few tables as possible

I don't see anywhere in xhtml where it states you have to use as few tables as possible.
xhtml just means "clean code" and "xml compatible", and while the philosophy behind it is that it provides a better environment for CSS prevalence over tables it doesn't mean you have to do it. You can also style tables with CSS very easily, and in some (many ?) cases that will do a cleaner and smaller html (which are the two main arguments for CSS-P) than if using CSS.

just my 2 cents
Quentin

**Dan Grossman** · Jul 20, 2003 23:53

XHTML doesn't state anything about how you should go about using it -- you can wrap your site in a million tables and make each page a megabyte in size.

It's just the philosophy that goes along with transitioning towards XML. If you don't want to try to adopt that philosophy, stick to HTML 4? This is just my advice as well, but I see no reason to use XHTML if you're not going to make the full changeover from the old way of thinking about web page design.

Another 2 cents from me. You're getting rich, Rizal.

**hurricane.uk** · Jul 21, 2003 02:20

XHTML is an extension of the HTML 4.01 standard, bringing XML functionality into it. By using xhtml over html 4.01 you will be opening your site up to a number of UAs that can't access html as well as a browser can, and also providing the capacity for your markup to interact with programming and scripting languages in a more logical way.

**xhtmlcoder** · Jul 22, 2003 07:50

eXtensible HyperText Markup Language (XHTML) is well-formed eXtensible Markup Language (XML) that has been written to mimic HTML 4.01.

Thus for future proofing the XHTML Family has the edge and potentially a wider user-agent, platform base and greater interoperability as was mentioned before.

**Dan Grossman** · Jul 23, 2003 00:24

Woot, our thread made it into the Tech Times

**AlexW** · Jul 23, 2003 00:30

I think XHTML is a good habit to get into. It takes little time to learn the differences and is more accessible for non-browser devices. Anyway it feels good

After a while I couldn't bring myself to write HTML anymore. I kinda feel dirty even seeing a in my old code, let alone writing one... hehehe . Have to spin a find and replace through the code before I can touch it. And unclosed list items?!?! (involuntary shiver)

**firegryphon3207** · Jul 23, 2003 01:31

Originally Posted by AlexW

And unclosed list items?!?! (involuntary shiver)

I'm not having too much trouble making the change. I was already in the habit of closing tags to begin with. When I started learning, I closed all tags possible, it was too confusing to try and remember which ones you had to close and which ones you didn't. It does feel good because your code is nice and neat. I have however been very lazy about changing some old code.

**vgarcia** · Jul 23, 2003 05:05

Originally Posted by AlexW

I think XHTML is a good habit to get into. It takes little time to learn the differences and is more accessible for non-browser devices. Anyway it feels good

After a while I couldn't bring myself to write HTML anymore. I kinda feel dirty even seeing a in my old code, let alone writing one... hehehe . Have to spin a find and replace through the code before I can touch it. And unclosed list items?!?! (involuntary shiver)

still has valid uses however. Try creating a layout that makes extensive use of floats; you'll find that you need a in there at least once.

**AlexW** · Jul 23, 2003 18:11

Oh I have nothing against ' '. Use it all the time.. ... just the non self-closing version ' ' makes me feel the need to wash.

**vgarcia** · Jul 23, 2003 19:15

Originally Posted by AlexW

Oh I have nothing against ' '. Use it all the time.. ... just the non self-closing version ' ' makes me feel the need to wash.

Yes it's a "dirty" tag to me, even in XHTML. I use it only when necessary

.

**Dan Grossman** · Jul 23, 2003 19:16

What does do?

I'm only 3/4 through "Designing with Web Standards" and haven't started "Eric Meyers on CSS" yet.

**AlexW** · Jul 23, 2003 19:31

Doesn't work pretty much the same as " " ?

(I wouldn't normally do it inline like that)

**Dan Grossman** · Jul 23, 2003 19:32

Don't know what either do

**Webnauts** · Jul 23, 2003 19:58

 breaks the text flow and resumes the next line after the specified margin is clear. This is often used to start the text below an aligned image (preventing text wrap). "none" is the default, causing a simple line break.

**Rizal** · Jul 24, 2003 02:25

Originally Posted by AlexW

I think XHTML is a good habit to get into. It takes little time to learn the differences and is more accessible for non-browser devices. Anyway it feels good [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img]

I'm in the middle of re-coding everything to validate to XHTML 1.0 standards. It was hard remembering closing those tags, making sure everything was properly nested but I feel much better now.

**DougBTX** · Jul 25, 2003 02:59

Originally Posted by vgarcia

still has valid uses however. Try creating a layout that makes extensive use of floats; you'll find that you need a in there at least once.

Why bother doing a CSS layout if you are going to keep on using Transitional HTML?

Douglas

**Rizal** · Jul 25, 2003 03:49

I'm already sold on XHTML 1.0. Now I need to compile a list of browsers (and their versions) that support (fully/partial) this standard. Any ideas?

**Webnauts** · Jul 25, 2003 04:07

Originally Posted by Rizal

I'm already sold on XHTML 1.0. Now I need to compile a list of browsers (and their versions) that support (fully/partial) this standard. Any ideas?

Are you looking for resources?

**DougBTX** · Jul 25, 2003 06:24

Originally Posted by Rizal

I'm already sold on XHTML 1.0. Now I need to compile a list of browsers (and their versions) that support (fully/partial) this standard. Any ideas?

No browser (that I know of) supports XHTML as XML, but most are quite happy to treat it as HTML 4.01

(If you follow these guides)

Douglas

**xhtmlcoder** · Jul 25, 2003 06:58

Well just remember within HTML 4.01 the start and end tags for the HTML, HEAD and BODY elements are optional, but specifying the Document Type Definition, the character encoding and the TITLE is a requirement.

That was one of the main reasons I never really liked HTML 4.01.

**redux** · Jul 25, 2003 07:08

Originally Posted by DougBTX

No browser (that I know of) supports XHTML as XML, but most are quite happy to treat it as HTML 4.01

(If you follow these guides)

Douglas

if i remember correctly, an xhtml strict document sent as application/xhtml+xml to Opera7 is treated as xml...so much so that if there is an error in its syntax, it shows a big fat error message right where the syntax error occurred (and not some quirks mode stuff)

**beetle** · Jul 25, 2003 12:14

Originally Posted by DougBTX

No browser (that I know of) supports XHTML as XML, but most are quite happy to treat it as HTML 4.01

Mozilla likes XML content just fine

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/xml; charset=UTF-8" />

**DougBTX** · Jul 25, 2003 12:31

Originally Posted by redux

if i remember correctly, an xhtml strict document sent as application/xhtml+xml to Opera7 is treated as xml...so much so that if there is an error in its syntax, it shows a big fat error message right where the syntax error occurred (and not some quirks mode stuff)

I stand corrected

IE6, Moz and Opera all throw nice big errors with invalid XML sent as XML, very cool. (That means that... I can use XHTML 2... today?)

There is hope yet

Douglas

Edit:

In each case, I sent this as application/xml along with a style sheet:

Code:

<?xml-stylesheet href="xml.css" type="text/css"?>
<mytag>
<my>hi</my>
<my>hii</my>
<my>hi</my>
</mytaggggggg>

With a correct end tag, all render the same

I wonder what IE5/IE5.5 do with it...

Douglas

Edit:

Works 100% in IE5.5 by the looks of it

atleast when loaded off your harddrive...

User Tag List

Thread: HTML 4.0 or XHTML 1.0?

Thread Tools

Display

HTML 4.0 or XHTML 1.0?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions