Yeah, but how far in the future? Realistically, most of the protocols that the Internet are built on will one day die, as will the way in which we communicate online. Increasingly everything is about instant interaction and gratification. This will only continue and I don't doubt that one day it won't be about "web pages" anymore and as that day draws near, HTML will die a slow death whereas XML could easily stay
IE7, Any news? (XML / XHTML discussion)
Collapse
X
-
-
XML is not a replacement for HTML - XHTML is...and if you know HTML, you already know most of XHTML.
XML is not, IMO, a fad. It's being backed, last I'd heard, by too many institutions/people. I could be wrong...that's what I've heard, though, and I'm inclined to believe it.Movie Forums - Now With 28% More Bruce WillisComment
-
I know it isn't the replacement for HTML, and XHMTL isn't really either. XHTML is just a transitional "let's make this compliant" standard, which is a good thing.
What I was saying is that HTML's job will one day become obsolete, and that XML could (I don't really care if it does), become the language used to transmit and recieve dataComment
-
I cannot see XML replacing HTML. Like i said above, it holds very little in the way of formatting pages.
If XML does replace HTML we will all have a more complex job formatting pages, and it will probably be done using XSL.
I think HTML will be replaced by XHTML by around 2006, but sadly all browsers will still have to be backwards compatible because most sites won't bother to make the upgrade (basically sort their coding).
* And i certainly know that XML isn't there to replace HTML, XHTML is, but it's for arguments sakeLast edited by Babylon; Mon 20 May '02, 10:57am.Comment
-
I think you're arguing semantics, I would take for granted that XML and XSL would function together and so lines like "it will probably be done using XSL" are kind of redundant.Comment
-
Originally posted by Jeremy W.
I think you're arguing semantics, I would take for granted that XML and XSL would function together and so lines like "it will probably be done using XSL" are kind of redundant.
It's merely because even if they do work together (refering to XML + XSL), they are different things, like HTML and CSS, even though they function together.Comment
-
CSS as a formatting style can be used anywhere, XSL was created for XML. It's much like saying VBScript and ASP are completely different. They are, but they aren't, if you know what I mean. 99.99% of developers who code ASP do it in VBS. Everytime someone talks about ASP they are talking about VBS and so the reality that they are "different" is kind of a moot point.
Sure XML and XSL are different, but they are the same in many more important waysComment
-
XHTML is primarily a more strict version of HTML that starts the task of separating content from display techniques. XHTML Strict is very limited, compared to HTML, but most of what can be done with HTML can be done with XHTML, albeit with CSS as opposed to pure (X)HTML.
The best thing you can do is learn CSS and be tip-top on CSS. XHTML you already know most of if you know HTML. And keep in mind, most browsers support XHTML in that they support HTML, not that they really support XHTML itself yet. So you've got a ways to go before browsers really support XHTML as the primary language.Comment
-
The best site I've found for XHTML and CSS is this one:
XHTML / CSS
For your information, vBulletin 3 uses XHTML 1.0 Transitional in conjunction with CSS 1.
And XHTML does allow column sizing with the transitional doctype, although as more browsers start to support it, it's better to use CSS for sizing instead.Comment
-
While we are on the subject, I guess I might as well talk a little about the vB3 templates...
They are all XHTML 1.0 Transitional, as I said above. I looked into going the whole hog and using XHTML 1.0 Strict, but after a long look at the way the strict doctype works, and the limitations it imposes, I decided that in the interests of keeping the templates relatively easy to edit and maintain, both for us developers, and for you webmasters, I would hold the fort at Transtional.
The reasons for not going all the way to Strict are many, but most of the reasons stem from ommisions in the XHTML Strict definition that seemingly defy logic. For example,Code:<a href="mypage.htm" [color=red]target="_blank"[/color]>my page</a>
Code:<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html> <head> <title>My Title</title> </head> <body> [color=red]Hello,<br /> My name is A N Other.<br /> How are you?[/color] </body> </html>
As you can see, XHTML strict is a nasty complex animal, and I decided that it was not in our best interests to use it, so we are using Transitional instead.
In order to ensure that any HTML you use is valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional, these are the basic rules you must follow:- The code must be "well-formed". In essence, this means that all tags must have a closing tag, and tags must not overlap. So <p>Hello<p>How are you? is not valid, while <p>Hello</p><p>How are you?</p> is okay, and <b>Hello <i>How are you?</b></i> is not valid, while <b>Hello <i>How are you?</i></b> is okay.
- All XHTML Elements Must Be Closed: This means (as above) that all tags must have a closing tag, such as <p>...</p> but also, all tags that normally have only an opening tag, such as the <img> tag must have a trailing slash, like this: <img src="myimage.gif" alt="my image"> becomes <img src="myimage.gif" alt="my image" />. This applies to all empty tags, including img, input, meta, br, hr, (etc.)
- Tag and attribute names must be in lower case: <DIV ALIGN="center">some text</DIV> is invalid, while <div align="center">some text</div> is okay.
- Attribute values must be quoted: <img src=myimage.gif width=80 height=20 alt=myimage /> is invalid, <img src="myimage.gif" width="80" height="20" alt="myimage" /> is okay.
- Attribute minimization is forbidden: <option value="12" selected>Twelve</option> is invalid, <option value="12" selected="selected">Twelve</option> is okay. The same applies to the attributes selected, checked, compact, readonly, disabled, multiple, nowrap and noresize amongst others.
The best place to start your XHTML adventures is here.Comment
-
hey Kier
Originally posted by Kier
For your information, vBulletin 3 uses XHTML 1.0 Transitional in conjunction with CSS 1.
Reading about your posts on XHTML Strict, i've been training for some time to be a webmaster and i totally agree with you about the problems of XHTML Strict so i always opt for Transitional.
It's very uncommon to see people with one of those WSC XHTML1.0 logos in the corner of their page!
But a final sorta thought on XHTML is the way it forces a standard of coding which i think is brill! You could go on 5 websites and i bet every single one of them would code the HTML slightly different. (Uppercase tag name, lowercase tag names, people who quote attributes, people who don't... blah blah, people that don't even end their tags )
So my personal thoughts towards XHTML are pretty positive And if people had always coded HTML the same way XHTML wouldn't seem such a big thing to people, for example
"<b>Hello <i>How are you?</b></i> is not valid" - those rules also apply in HTML which you probably know, but most people just never bothered to comply with the rules.Comment
Related Topics
Collapse
-
by DemOnstarHello there. I am about to embark on another aspect of this massive learning curve and I need your help. I have given up on permissions for the time being because I am not getting very far there.
...-
Channel: Support Issues & Questions
-
Comment