Diff between HTML and XHTML??

[MohsinAli]

Wot is the Diff between HTML and XHTML??

[paul_wilkins]

One has an X on it.

The HTML and XHTML forum has a couple of excellent articles about XHTML vs HTML and XHTML1.0 vs XHTML 1.1 along with Frequently Asked Questions about HTML

[paul_wilkins]

One has an X on it.

The HTML and XHTML forum has a couple of excellent articles about XHTML vs HTML and XHTML1.0 vs XHTML 1.1 along with Frequently Asked Questions about HTML

[felgall]

In terms of JavaScript, the difference between HTML and XHTML is huge.

JavaScript interacts with HTML using commands such as document.write(), .innerHTML and .createElement()

To interact with XHTML JavaScript can only use commands such as createElementNS() and none of the versions that work with HTML will work with XHTML.

[cranial-bore]

Using XHTML allows you to put your nose a little higher in the air and scoff faintly when browsing the web.

[felgall]

The other thing to remember with XHTML is that Internet Explorer 8 (and earlier) doesn't support it and so you would need to serve your pages to those using that browser as HTML even if you are going to serve it as XHTML to everyone else (unless you just forget about IE users). Microsoft have also indicated that they have no plans to add support for XHTML to IE9.

[paul_wilkins]

In effect then Microsoft have killed off XHTML, because keeping compatibility with IE effectively means an inability to leverage the advantages of XHTML in a cross-platform way. This is why many developers decide to stay with HTML 4, XHTML and the IE woes just aren't worth the pain.

[AutisticCuckoo]

Frequently Asked Questions About XHTML vs HTML

[Amenthes]

It's not only Microsoft who's "killing" XHTML, it's also Mozilla, Opera and Safari who pay much more attention to the HTML 5 draft. And that may be because it is so much activity out there, as opposed to XHTML 2, which as far as I know is developed by a closed committee.

I heard nothing new about XHTML 2, while news about HTML 5 and WHATWG appear constantly.

[AutisticCuckoo]

Well, the XHTML5 draft is developed in parallel with HTML5, so I wouldn't necessarily agree with that description. (That both HTML5 and XHTML5 are semantic disasters with an utter contempt for accessibility is a different matter.)

[felgall]

Well, the XHTML5 draft is developed in parallel with HTML5, so I wouldn't necessarily agree with that description. (That both HTML5 and XHTML5 are semantic disasters with an utter contempt for accessibility is a different matter.)

I agree with all of what you said.

[M-M-J]

Well, the XHTML5 draft is developed in parallel with HTML5, so I wouldn't necessarily agree with that description. (That both HTML5 and XHTML5 are semantic disasters with an utter contempt for accessibility is a different matter.)

o.O, we are already at XHTML 5???

[felgall]

o.O, we are already at XHTML 5???

XHTML 5 bears the same relationship to HTML 5 as XHTML 1.0 bears to HTML 4.01. It is an entirely separate development path for XHTML to the one with XHTML 1.1 and XHTML 2.0.

The only thing that XHTML 5 and XHTML 2.0 have in common is that they are both proposed standards that are still in development. Neither of them is close to being supported by browsers although XHTML 5 is closer to being supported as it is much closer to the way that current HTML is written than either XHTML 1.1 or XHTML 2.0 is and so most of thhe commands it contains can be interpreted by browsers as if it were HTML 4.01. Those that can't fall into two groups - those that were deprecated in HTML 4.01 for good reason and should never have been put back into (X)HTML 5 and those new ideas (some good, some bad) which are the proposed additions to the existing language.