Re: [Fwd: XHTML 1.1 or 1.0?]

[Sigurd Gartmann <sigurdga-marketling-list brogar org>]

> Joachim Noreiko <jnoreiko yahoo com> 2006-09-30 12:59:
>
> Looking at the wikipedia article on XHTML, the only
> advantage of 1.1 I can see is:
> This version also allows for ruby markup support,
> needed for East-Asian languages (especially CJK).
>
> Is this an important advantage? (By the way: an extra
> use case for the website: "Is gnome available in
> language x?" I can't currently find this from the
> site.)
> Are there any other advantages?
>
> Can we get an idea of what proportion of visitors to
> wgo use IE, perhaps from server logs?
> It might be fair to suppose that most of our audience
> already use a free browser even if they are on
> windows, but then this would exclude people who might
> happen to want to access the site from work, a
> library, a web cafe, etc.

I don't think we affort to block IE users. However there is
another solution to this, according to this MSDN IE blog [1]:

"(...) and it is generally easy to set up most servers to
conditionally serve content as “text/html” when the
“application/xml+xhtml” MIME type is not supported."

Should we be forward compatible or backward compatible in this
case; by stepping back to XHTML 1.0 strict for every visitor or
letting the XHTML 1.1 (and newer) compliant browsers get newer
versions.

We should probably take the safest and shortest road to our goal
and decide to go for 1.0 strict.

[1] http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/09/15/467901.aspx


Sigurd