W3C is an utter failure. If we have to discuss which one to use and why it is different is what makes development for the many browsers so damn confusing.
Differences in how it is used, yes, but this is about learning them. When learning them, self closing the tags is the most important thing to remember. When using them, you must remember the correct mime type (a simple thing) and bear in mind a few facts about error checking / validation in XML (not so much a hard thing to learn, but just something to be aware of).
Many will disagree, and say that it’s not the “proper way” of learning or using this, but I would say that you should just learn XHTML right off the bat, merely because it’s tidier than HTML and will look roughly the same any way.
Just thought of it. Why doesn’t ALL of the browser manufactures get TOGETHER and bang out a solid core, where all browser are the EXACT same, then each browser manufacture can have “add-ons” that would make their browser unique and pander to their followers? Gezz, what a concept.
Because there is something called ‘competition’ where each rendering engine continually improves over time to outdo their competitors, driving innovation and acceptance of new standards. If they all used the same one, the web would just stagnate and not move forwards. Terrible idea I’m afraid!
Meh. Continue to take time out of your day and complain about the browsers problems, while my idea would have ended it. Oh, and I guess you didn’t read all of my comment. I said, browsers would have add-on’s that would make them UNIQUE and separate them from the OTHER browsers! That alone would create competition, would it not? Exact same Core, and different unique features. There, that would end this argument, and the million others related to this, forever.
So, I stand by my comment.
I don’t complain about browser’s problems?
It might create competition in the ‘addons’ area, but not in terms of supporting newer HTML standards and innovating in that area. Competition is a GOOD thing in the world!
What I mean about complaining of browser problems is, telling noob’s either to learn HTML 4.1 vs. XHTML vs. HTML 5 makes it very hard for people to enter this field. Being, the browser created this problem. When discussing which technology the person should purser, and differ about it, again, is the mess that is browsers…
Anyways, opinions are great, and so is competition
HTML versions have nothing to do with cross browser compatibility issues, so I don’t see how this thread would be relevant when discussing a solution to cross browser compatibility.
Really? When did IE8 support XHTML fully? Not to mention of the mess CSS has become.
W3C should be dissolved, and taken over by the browser manufactures. This crap would be over in 5-10 years, and make development so much easier.
Yes, he did serve ‘application/xhtml+xml’ just like myself; to browsers that can accept it, and to those that cannot they get given ‘text/html’.
The browser manufacturers are already involved in the W3C, so that’s obviously not true!
The standards are fine, it’s the browsers taking their time supporting them, and the users taking even longer to upgrade that’s the problem.
IE8 doesn’t support XHTML, but what does that have to do with learning it? It might influence how you serve it, whether you use it etc, but not about which version of HTML you should learn first. The answer to that would probably be the same independent of what browsers could do at the moment.
Look, we are never going to agree, so I’m just going to stop. You won! Yay!
I will close it by saying: W3C should go of the way of Netscape, and become non-existent. To replace it, the Corps should control the user end of the web. Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, and Google should make a browser-path that all have to adapt to. Put it in writing. Have the browser manufactures meet 4 times a year go give each other a progress update.
That will structure a chaos internet. Just turn the web into a business format.
Done.
I’ve heard that the only practical difference most people see between Mars and Earth is the athmosphere.
This thread is becoming somewhat of a joke. Saying html is always html for browsers is the dumbest thing one can provide as teaching advice.
What tags does your html have? What attributes? Are you sure they are understood by browsers? There are html standards old as granny browsers don’t support well even today.
Browsers do treat differently XHTML 1.0 from HTML 4.01 and from HTML5. Hell, many don’t even handle XHTML well, not to mention many don’t have HTML5 implemented yet.
And don’t come and tell me now XHTML 1.0 and HTML5 are not html! DTD does matter. You’re stumbling about in technical implementations and mix them up with specifications.
Yeah, I’ve heard about this speed course in HTML5. You change your doctype to
<!DOCTYPE HTML>
et violá, another HTML5 savvy out the assembly line.
There is so much semnatic mixup in HTML5, as oppossed to HTML 4.01, and we are arguing years over properly learning HTML 4.01. Guess how long HTML5 would take to PROPERLY learn? Certainly not a week-end, since now there are two specs for HTML5, and these two don’t say the same thing always.
But I see what you and samanime are saying: any beginner should just start throwing tags in a text file, and the damn browsers better do something good about it, or else they’ll complain and ***** and come to SPF forums for somebody to do the job for them learning nothing in the process.
I would kindly disagree.
I would instruct newbies to take this as a joke.
You can disagree all you like, but it’s a fact! It doesn’t
IE 9 (released today) is the first version of IE to support XHTML.
Nah-ah.
-
HTML compatible XHTML 1.0 may be sent with the “text/html”.
-
You can serve XHTML documents as “application/xhtml+xml” to IE8- also, you just need to know how.
-
Namespaces, a XHTML (and XML) feature, can be use since IE5.
Three points of hard facts. Got anything else than your word?
Not ‘legally’.
With a plugin yes, but not practically.
Supporting one part of a language doesn’t mean you support the language.
Three responses.
Three (shady) responses, that confirm, nonetheless, what I’m saying: IE does support XHTML - interpreting and rendering.
It supports XHTML served as text/html, which basically makes it invalid HTML, not XHTML.