[thelist] XHTML overrated (was: CSS, Netscape, .class oddity?)

aardvark roselli at earthlink.net
Sun Jul 23 22:17:06 CDT 2000

> From: snowboom2 at mindspring.com
> At work we are using an xsl based template system
> to generate various pages
> which are all exported to html. The thing is,
> using normal html code in the
> xsl sheets made the parser choke and we had to
> use proper xhtml which now
> works flawlessly. As systems using xml become
> more common the importance of
> knowing proper xhtml (and xml) increases. It's
> not like html where your
> table might have an extra row, in our system at
> least, improper coding would
> result in no page being generated at all.

now *this* is a reason... and a damn good one... much better
than Champeon's reasons... at least this is a real
*technical* reason...

> though, the best reason for coding in xhtml is to
> just get into the practice
> of it, because it is pretty strict and for some
> it could take awhile to get
> into the hang of coding properly. If you write
> valid html now, the transition will be much easier.

feh, it's a 10-minute transition... the hardest part is the
case-sensitivity, which i've already gotten past...

i *do* like the fact that XHTML is supposed to be very
strict... after years of massaging my code, while some
marketing hack with FP churns out themed-crap, it will be
nice... but i have to assume the browsers (IE, really) will
adopt that strictness...

this isn't supposed to be a rant against XHTML, but i
certainly want to know good reasons why we *all* should code
it... snowboom's reason is good, but very specific...

anyone else?

More information about the thelist mailing list