Re: [wgo] XHTML1.0 Strict vs HTML 4.01

["Thilo Pfennig" <tpfennig gmail com>]

Hi Ricky,

I think some of your points may be valid. But:

1. I think XHTML is good enough for our purposes.
2. This is a bit of a hen and egg problem: If no one implements XHTML
in websites the support will be less good and if the support is less
good no one will use it at websites. This is the same thing with CSS.
I have used CSS as soon as the first browsers supported it - this was
a total mess. The situation today is much, much, much better than
1997-2000 where there were really ugly browser wars and
incompatibility was widespread.

You can find A LOT XHTML sites out there and i have not heard of any
greater problems. I still keep having some compatibility problems if
sites are optimized for IE. This world is not perfect, but i think it
is a good way to use a widely accepted standard that might not have
the same percentage of support like the other standards. To be
absolutely shure one would have to use HTML 2 oder 3.2 - you can
always extend support by going back in time. But i also see GNOME as a
organisation which wants to support modern standards so it is also Ok,
if some browsers that do not care about standards do have some
problems as long as this does not mean that they can not access the
website at all.

The thing is that we would not have wide CSS support if not more and
more sites would have begun to use it. There is no automatic progress.
Progress comes from actually using new technology and not waiting for
it to become 100% supported all by itself. This is a bit of a logic
problem. ;-)


ciao,

Thilo



--
Blog: http://vinci.wordpress.com
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tpfennig