SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Xhtml 2?

  1. #1
    SitePoint Evangelist N9ne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    581
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Xhtml 2?

    I just found out from the w3c site that XHTML 2 exists - so I went ahead and put the doctype in my document:

    Code:
    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 2.0//EN"
    	"TBD">
    I then went to the validator at w3c, and got these 2 things:

    Warning:

    Unknown namespace (http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xhtml2) for text/html document!
    and...

    Line 4 column 45: value of fixed attribute "xmlns" not equal to default

    <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xhtml2" xml:lang="en">
    What can I do to fix this? Or should I just stick to XHTML 1.1?

  2. #2
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    XHTML 2 exists, but is not a qualified, recommend spec yet. That's why it won't validate.

    For now, yes, do stick to XHTML 1.1.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Evangelist N9ne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    581
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok, I suppose i'll go back in time to XHTML 1.1 .

    When will it validate though?

    Oh, and the inevitable question: When will IE start supporting the latest standards properly

  4. #4
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It will probably validate once XHTML 2 becomes a fully qualified, recommended spec (it's still a working draft).

    Internet Explorer? Pffft. Never.

  5. #5
    Also available in Large Si's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Walsall, UK
    Posts
    1,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think Microsoft need a reality check with supporting web-standards. Ever since they invented that bloody marquee tag......
    Si
    Are you a Photoshop Jedi Master? Prove it!

    Is funky house your bag? You'll love this!

    Voice
    , eyes, ears, body and hands.


  6. #6
    ********* Wizard silver trophy Cam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Burpengary, Australia
    Posts
    4,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Well version 7 of IE is still quite a while away and with the upcoming XAML, I'd say that unless they want to write huge parser engines to support crappy code, they'll be a little more understanding of standards.

  7. #7
    Super Ninja Monkey Travis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Sioux City, Iowa
    Posts
    691
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigsi
    I think Microsoft need a reality check with supporting web-standards. Ever since they invented that bloody marquee tag......
    Funny you should say that, since your own portfolio doesn't work correctly in Firefox or validate.
    Travis Watkins - Hyperactive Coder
    My Blog: Realist Anew
    Projects: Alacarte - Gnome Menu Editor

  8. #8
    SitePoint Wizard megamanXplosion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,099
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I took a look at XHTML 2 a few times in the past. Luckily it's still a working draft and things will change, because it needs to. For example...

    Code:
    <p>
      <line>Whatever</line>
      <line>Whatever</line>
      <line>Whatever</line>
    </p>
    That's crazy! I REALLY REALLY REALLY hope that they will remove such nonsense. Preserving structure in documents is important, but that is fanatical...

  9. #9
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Besides which, it completely breaks the model of "do not force line breaks"...


  10. #10
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    My 2 cents

    Funny you should say that, since your own portfolio doesn't work correctly in Firefox or validate.
    Unsolicited site reviews aren't always appreciated, especially if they are used as an attempt to devaluate someone's statement, even when in jest.
    it completely breaks the model of "do not force line breaks"...
    Not necessarily; I didn't check the specs, but having each line enveloped in a seperate line element doesn't explicitly mean line breaks, too. If the line elements are defined as default inline level elements they will just continue on as regular inline content and element do now.
    It does however strike me as a bit superfluous...
    Regards,
    Ronald.

  11. #11
    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)
    XHTML 2.0; try 2010 or something then another 10 years until Microsoft decide to support the technology correctly.

  12. #12
    Also available in Large Si's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Walsall, UK
    Posts
    1,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis
    Funny you should say that, since your own portfolio doesn't work correctly in Firefox or validate.
    I'm not fussed mate - I designed that site over two years ago before I had learned all about true standards. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to upgrade it so I'm not too fussed about it. The website served its purpose and got me a job as a web designer.

    Cheers for the check though - I'm a regular FireBird user now and haven't noticed any problems with my site.
    Si
    Are you a Photoshop Jedi Master? Prove it!

    Is funky house your bag? You'll love this!

    Voice
    , eyes, ears, body and hands.


  13. #13
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    406
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The point of <line> is so that you don't need <br/> tags. In situations where a line-break has clear semantic meaning - such as maybe the lines of a postal address - it indicates a line but leaves the rendering (line break, space, comma or whatever) up to the user-agent.

    That's what <line> is for

  14. #14
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I see.

  15. #15
    ********* Wizard silver trophy Cam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Burpengary, Australia
    Posts
    4,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigsi
    Cheers for the check though - I'm a regular FireBird user now and haven't noticed any problems with my site.
    Some people should check at the Mozilla site before emphasising program names

  16. #16
    Also available in Large Si's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Walsall, UK
    Posts
    1,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Explain the attached then....

    (where's my attached file???)
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by bigsi; May 18, 2004 at 01:40.
    Si
    Are you a Photoshop Jedi Master? Prove it!

    Is funky house your bag? You'll love this!

    Voice
    , eyes, ears, body and hands.


  17. #17
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You either used the Firewhat extension, or else you're a version behind.

  18. #18
    Also available in Large Si's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Walsall, UK
    Posts
    1,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    EEP! Time to upgrade then!!
    Si
    Are you a Photoshop Jedi Master? Prove it!

    Is funky house your bag? You'll love this!

    Voice
    , eyes, ears, body and hands.


  19. #19
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  20. #20
    SitePoint Wizard DougBTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Bath, UK
    Posts
    2,498
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by megamanXplosion
    That's crazy! I REALLY REALLY REALLY hope that they will remove such nonsense. Preserving structure in documents is important, but that is fanatical...
    I think you've missed the point somewhat

    You've also looked at an old draft, it is now the <l> element: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-inli...t.html#sec_9.7.

    I think the example should be cleaned up, because it does sort of sugest that it could be used for every line, but only every line where there is a line, not a block of text in your example. So:

    Code:
    <p>This is the warp of the loom as it escapes<br />
    through the farmhouse window, leaves<br />
    the factory behind, slides out the door<br />
    </p>
    
    <p>of the homely craftswoman who wants to<br />
    sell her art at the fair. The threads have<br />
    turned silver from traveling so long in the sky<br />
    </p>
    becomes

    Code:
    <p>
    <l>This is the warp of the loom as it escapes</l>
    <l>through the farmhouse window, leaves</l>
    <l>the factory behind, slides out the door</l>
    </p>
    
    <p>
    <l>of the homely craftswoman who wants to</l>
    <l>sell her art at the fair. The threads have</l>
    <l>urned silver from traveling so long in the sky</l>
    </p>
    And every other example stays the same.

    Douglas
    Last edited by DougBTX; May 18, 2004 at 11:50.
    Hello World

  21. #21
    SitePoint Wizard DougBTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Bath, UK
    Posts
    2,498
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by N9ne
    Or should I just stick to XHTML 1.1?
    Stick with XHTML 1.0 Strict, then you don't get messed up with the MIME type problems if you are doing valid XHTML 1.1. (If you don't use the MIME type for XHTML 1.1, you might as well be writing HTML 3.02; if you are using the correct MIME type it won't work in IE)

    What does 1.1 do which you want it to do anyway?

    Douglas
    Hello World

  22. #22
    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)
    Transitional is only the backwards compatible version (ignoring Frameset of course) Strict onwards should use the relevant MIME.

  23. #23
    SitePoint Evangelist N9ne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    581
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DougBTX
    Stick with XHTML 1.0 Strict, then you don't get messed up with the MIME type problems if you are doing valid XHTML 1.1. (If you don't use the MIME type for XHTML 1.1, you might as well be writing HTML 3.02; if you are using the correct MIME type it won't work in IE)

    What does 1.1 do which you want it to do anyway?

    Douglas
    Nothing especially, I just like being up to date I guess. I'm not sure of the differences of XHTML 1.0 Strict and XHTML 1.1, but it doesn't bother me as long as my page validates (yes, I'm a validation freak).

  24. #24
    SitePoint Wizard DougBTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Bath, UK
    Posts
    2,498
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by xhtmlcoder
    Transitional is only the backwards compatible version (ignoring Frameset of course) Strict onwards should use the relevant MIME.
    http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-typ...s.html#summary

    HTML Compatible XHTML 1.0 "may" be sent as text/html. This is the division (compatible vs. non-compatible) and has nothing to do with whether you use a strict or transitional doctype. HTML compatible XHTML 1.0 Strict may be sent as text/html, though all versions of XHTML "should" be sent as application/xhtml+xml, though again with no distinction between strict and transitional.

    N9ne: the validator can't tell you whether your alt text is correct alt text, so it can never tell you if a page is perfectly valid

    Douglas
    Hello World


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
  •