While trying to figure out what I was doing wrong with my configuration,
I ran across some old uppercase HTML. There are also some unquoted tag
attributes. This would be OK had the file not said that it was xhtml.
This diff is against the 3.5.2 snapshot, but I didn’t see any difference in
svn in this file since then.
Steve Peters
steve@fisharerojo.org
create.diff (2.1 KB)
Steve Peters wrote:
While trying to figure out what I was doing wrong with my configuration,
I ran across some old uppercase HTML. There are also some unquoted tag
attributes. This would be OK had the file not said that it was xhtml.This diff is against the 3.5.2 snapshot, but I didn’t see any difference in
svn in this file since then.
I’m not very big on XHTML. (Although it’s Jesse’s call, of course.)
A few weeks ago I did some reading up on it, and basically the only
advantage to xhtml is that you can put it through an xml validator
instead of a html validator.
One downside is that for some browsers to properly detect and render
xhtml you need to send it as a special mime type. application/xhtml+xml
Another is that XHTML is not a superset of HTML. For various reasons
(cough, sgml, cough), legal xhtml constructs are not legal HTML constructs.
In my world, I’ve decided to stick with HTML 4.01. Uppercase tags vs
lowercase tags? I don’t really care.
-R
(On an airplane.)