Do we really need the X on there? I know it seems trivial however with HTML5 coming in and there no longer really being a need to write XHTML can we make this more generic please?
HTML5 has an XHTML5 counterpart (I have no idea why anyone would want to use it but the option is there) so by having (X)HTML in the forum name, it makes it clear that the forum deals with both forms of the language. And there are still a lot of sites out there using XHTML1.
I don’t see any problem with having the (X) there … if you only want to talk about good old HTML then that’s fine, and you can!
That’s what its being inside the parentheses means. If you want it fine, if not, that’s fine too.
For example if I don’t know if something is singular or plural, rather than write a more verbose sentence I could do something like.
“When you sent your letter(s) to them, did they reply?”
Similar for unknown gender
“Did (s)he ask about that?”
I don’t know if it’s “legal” English, but it is commonly used.
Internet Explorer 8 still has too many people using it to allow sites to be created using XHTML yet.
Once IE8 dies then creating sites with XHTML5 will be a perfectly practical alternative.
The only real question is whether IE8 will die before (X)HTML5 becomes the standard or whether XHTML1/HTML4 will still be the standard when it becomes practical to use XHTML.
It’s a good point
HTML is HTML at the end of the day, it does come in many flavours, HTML3, HTML4, xHTML, HTML5 so simply naming it “HTML forum” makes sense as it covers all bases?
Not really … XHTML is a different language to HTML, it just happens to have a lot of similarities
HTML 2, HTML 3.2, HTML 4, HTML 5 - all versions of HTML (runs in all web browsers)
XHTML 1, XHTML 1.5, XHTML 5 - all versions of XHTML (runs in all modern web browsers, doesn’t run in IE8, Netscape 4 or other early browsers).
HTML 2 through 4 are defined using the SGML standard
All versions of XHTML are defined using the XML standard which itself is defined using the SGML standard.
HTML 1 and HTML 5 are not defined according to any standard.
While XHTML can sometimes be run as HTML (if you only use a selected subset), HTML can never be run as XHTML.
With HTML the browser is supposed to try to fix any errors in the markup as best it can. With XHTML the browser is supposed to stop trying to display the page when it finds an error.
Many tags that are optional in HTML are mandatory in XHTML - eg. <head> <body> <tbody>
HTML has singleton tags, XHTML doesn’t:
<br> - valid HTML but invalid XHTML
<br></br> - valid XHTML but invalid HTML
<br/> - valid XHTML, invalid in HTML but HTML can ignore the invalid / and keep going
I’m not questioning the differences between the two languages and understand these, I’m questioning whether the sub forum name needs to include the (X). Surely anybody visiting looking for info on XHTML is going to go there anyway?
That was exactly my point, of course there are technical differences between XHTML and HTML, but the vast majority of users would look for XHTML in the HTML forums anyway?
Perhaps. but perhaps not. It is difficult to say what users would expect given that XHTML is still unusable due to IE8 not having died yet.
Once IE8 dies the difference may even be sufficient to require separate forums.
I don’t think we want specific forums for HTML vs XHTML, I’d like the current forum to be renamed to simply HTML and all variations to be captured under this.
It’s not named XHTML
As previously said, the parentheses in this use mean take it or leave it.
As mentioned, XHTML is still a thing, and will remain a thing for a long time to come (possibly beyond the life of this forum), and it’s a different thing from HTML, so it’s still appropriate to have that bracketed X in there, as it indicates that the forum welcomes questions on both forms of this language.
HTML and XHTML are not variants - they are completely different markup languages. Specifying <X>HTML as the forum name indicates that both of them are included in the same forum. Leaving off the (X) would give a lot of people the impression that XHTML was to be excluded.