SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: xml/xhtml

  1. #1
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    xml/xhtml

    Please could someone explain to me the difference between XML and XHTML.

    Thanks in advance.

    Azaar

  2. #2
    Ensure you finish what you sta bronze trophy John Colby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    University of Central England, U.K.
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    XHTML is HTML reformulated in XML.

    XML (eXtensible MArkup Language) is a flexible markup derived from SGML and used in large scale electronic publishing, and now finding its way into data interchange and databases.

    From http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/ - What is XHTML?

    "The Extensible HyperText Markup Language (XHTML™) is a family of current and future document types and modules that reproduce, subset, and extend HTML, reformulated in XML. XHTML Family document types are all XML-based, and ultimately are designed to work in conjunction with XML-based user agents. XHTML is the successor of HTML, and a series of specifications has been developed for XHTML."

    and from http://www.w3.org/XML/

    "Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a simple, very flexible text format derived from SGML (ISO 8879). Originally designed to meet the challenges of large-scale electronic publishing, XML is also playing an increasingly important role in the exchange of a wide variety of data on the Web and elsewhere."

    HTML 4.01 reformulated to XHTML 1.0 Strict and XHTML 1.0 Frameset - use whichever is appropriate.

    Then XHTML 1.0 Strict - more formal - none of the deprectaed stuff. No frames (YES!!)

    Then XHTML 1.1 - modularisation of XHTML - few changes from XHTML 1.0 strict, see the relevant W3C page.

    The latest development is XHTML 2.0 - under development - rarther different from the previous offerings.

    The latest realistic offering for developing websites is XHTML 1.1
    John
    No electrons were harmed during the creation, transmission
    or reading of this posting. However, many were excited and
    some may have enjoyed the experience.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thanks for your comprehensive reply, if i understand correctly i should be learning/coding in xhtml 1.1. I currently use html 4.01. Am i correct ?

  4. #4
    Ensure you finish what you sta bronze trophy John Colby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    University of Central England, U.K.
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Azaar
    if i understand correctly i should be learning/coding in xhtml 1.1. I currently use html 4.01. Am i correct ?
    I think so - HTML 4.01's development has now stopped. XHTML is the way to go, and XHTML 1.1 is the latest workable and widely supported version.

    I teach (among other things) web programming and at undergraduae and postgraduate level we're standardising on XHTML 1.1 and CSS because that's the way the web's going to be for a large nyumber of people, despite Microsoft's attempts to subvert it.

    The things I take out of XHTML 1.1 are the purely presentational tags like <b> <i> <big> <small> <tt> - those being left out of XHTML 2.0. All these can be dealt with in CSS and have no place in semantic markup.

    </hobby_horse>
    John
    No electrons were harmed during the creation, transmission
    or reading of this posting. However, many were excited and
    some may have enjoyed the experience.

  5. #5
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks again for your reply, how do older browsers cope with xhtml 1.1 as it is so new ? I guessing netscape 4 borks...

  6. #6
    Ensure you finish what you sta bronze trophy John Colby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    University of Central England, U.K.
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Azaar
    Thanks again for your reply, how do older browsers cope with xhtml 1.1 as it is so new ? I guessing netscape 4 borks...
    A question - with less than 1% of the browsing population and fast disappearing why are you bothering?

    If you'e making commercial sites you may have to bother but look at these stats for technically aware people visiting w3schools.com

    http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_war.asp

    I test on IE6, OPera 7.21 and 7.3, Firebird 0.7, Konqueror on Linux and when I can Safari (buying a new laptop soon so it'll be easier)

    I apply the known quirks reduction mechanisms so that IE5 will work - but at the rate its reducing I'm getting less bothered - dropped 33% in six months.

    Netscape has been dumped by AOL, Mozilla will be replacing its current browser with Firebird (which is cross OS) and other browsers will display the infomation on the pages maybe not as prettily but wil display.

    What I'm more interested in is the rise in the mobile internet market - from a report of 14 Oct 03:

    "Mobile access to the internet has trebled in the last 12 months, with the total number of page impressions viewed during August being 884 million according to the Mobile Data Association (MDA).

    "The figure, from GSM Network operators O2, Orange, T-Mobile and Vodafone, takes the daily average to 28.5 million, compared to 9 million per day in August 2002, MDA said."

    http://www.cellular.co.za/news_2003/...net_treble.htm

    That threefold increase in a year determines the way that the internet population is going - and those with mobiles are the ones with money - where e-commerce spend will be coming from, not someone with a really ancient PC. That may be looking at it with mercenary eyes, but that's what commercial organisations are going to do.

    Which is why I recommend the latest standards - they'll work across all these devices, and you retain accessibility. Hacking yourself into the area of burning midnight oil to satisfy the vast minority is not, in my view, a worthwhile expenditure of time. Unless you really like hacking.
    John
    No electrons were harmed during the creation, transmission
    or reading of this posting. However, many were excited and
    some may have enjoyed the experience.

  7. #7
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Again, thanks for your answer. I don't as a rule of thumb bother coding for NS4 however i was concerned that older versions of IE might struggle. Sunds like xhtml is the place to be, and from what i've seen it isn't much of a earning curve to make the jumo.

    Azaar

  8. #8
    Robert Wellock silver trophybronze trophy xhtmlcoder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    A Maze of Twisty Little Passages
    Posts
    6,316
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Any browser that can cope with HTML 4.01 will understand XHTML served as text/html for backwards compatibility.

    Now, on the other hand if you serve XHTML as an application of XML then that is where the fun starts because you require an application with a inbuilt XML Processor, for example Mozilla or Opera 7.2x.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •