Is XHTML flawed?

[ThomasAesir]

OK, I've been reading up on XHTML and the more I read the more I gasp in horror. Maybe I'm missing something here but when I read that:

- Scripting is unsupported
- Frames only limited
- Flash is Not Supported
- Java Applets are Not Supported

I have to ask myself "Why is the w3c trying to kill everything that's good about the internet?"

Maybe I have my facts mixed up but I thought that XHTML is supposed to replace HTML. How can it replace HTML and only support a fraction of what is needed?

What will happen to flash and Java if XHTML is supported?

[Hierophant]

Where did you get your information?

XHTML supports the script tag.
There are two DTDs available with full frame usage (just like in HTML).
You can use the object tag to embed flash and java applets in your page.

[ThomasAesir]

Reading this
XHTML Basic article by Molly E. Holzschlag from New Architect.

XHTML supports the script tag.
There are two DTDs available with full frame usage (just like in HTML).
You can use the object tag to embed flash and java applets in your page.

In that case I take back everything I said . I guess the article was out of date.

Scripting. The script and nonscript elements aren't supported. Scripts demand processing power, which many of the smaller, alternative devices simply don't have.

Frames. Frames are based on the interfaces provided by a Web browser. Because the user agents in alternative devices are very limited and very small, frames don't make sense. As such, they're completely unsupported in XHTML Basic.

Objects. The object element, used for things such as Java applets or Flash files, is prohibited. Once again, the simplicity of alternative devices doesn't allow for this kind of advanced functionality.

[Flawless_koder]

Never take info on a browswer's ability from anything other than the horses mouth - unless you're looking at the structs yourself - you don't know where compatiblity might have been built in.
The same goes for protocols and langauges.

Flawless

[iTec]

- Scripting is unsupported
<script> and <noscript> are supported in all 3 DTD's

- Frames only limited
Frames are supported in the Frames and Transitional DTD, its not supported in the strict dtd

- Flash is Not Supported
- Java Applets are Not Supported
<Object> is supported in all 3 DTD's

XHTML isnt the end of all that is good

[DougBTX]

Originally posted by ThomasAesir
I guess the article was out of date.

It might be that too, but I think the most important part here is:

Right now, there really aren't too many examples of modularization in action. One very clean example is XHTML Basic, which became a W3C Candidate Recommendation in November 2000. XHTML Basic was created specifically for use in mobile and alternative devices such as smart phones, PDAs, pagers...

Douglas

[ThomasAesir]

XHTML isnt the end of all that is good

Well, that's a relief.

From now on I'll spend more time reading W3C articles.

[ThomasAesir]

One very clean example is XHTML Basic, which became a W3C Candidate Recommendation in November 2000.

Oh ok, so does that mean that this XHTML Basic is different from XHTML? Like XHTML Basic for devices and XHTML for normal internet surfing.

[DougBTX]

As it says in the artice

From what it says, XHTML Basic would be part of XHTML, but on a fully featured browser (on a PC for example), more modules would be rendered, so content such as Flash etc would display.

What I'm not sure about, is what a Palmtop working on XHTML Basic would do if it found an <object> tag: would it ignore it, or say "page contains errors"? Guess it all comes down to writing pages for what users you'll be getting

Douglas

[Hierophant]

XHTML Basic is to XHTML like WML is to HTML.

[Skunk]

From XHTML 1.1 onwards the XHTML spec will be seperated in to modules. The basic module will just support basic structural markup (lists, paragraphs and so forth), while other modules will add support for things like scripting, applets and frames. That way devices such as mobile phones can be built that only support XHTML basic, while full browsers like Mozilla/IE can support the whole lot.

[redux]

Originally posted by DougBTX

What I'm not sure about, is what a Palmtop working on XHTML Basic would do if it found an <object> tag: would it ignore it, or say "page contains errors"? Guess it all comes down to writing pages for what users you'll be getting

i'll hazard a guess and say (hope ?) that these browsers will ignore it. otherwise, we'd be back where we started.
in the worst case, you'd have to have a "fully featured" XML and separate XSLTs that recognise what capabilities the user's browser has and prepare the output accordingly (which is the next step up...XHTML is only a "stopgap" technology, in my view).

[Gybbyl]

I just got the XHTML black book, and there are seperate chapters telling how to insert Java, Javascripting, Flash, XML, and many other things into XHTML pages...

I know this has already been said, but was just startled when i saw the first post!

[Gybbyl]

Oh, thinking about it, i kinda wish i could recast my vote!

Every language is flawed, be it XML, XHTML, HTML, php, asp, c++... you name it.

There may not be big flaws, but they are all flawed.

Nothing is perfect.