Re: HTML vs XHTML

[MJ Ray]

Davi Leal <address@hidden> wrote: [...]
> fsf.org "works" on IE6 because of they send XHTML with a content-type 
> of "text/html".  Sending XHTML that way means you get none of the XML-related 
> benefits due to browsers use the HTML parser -- It is written with XHTML but 
> actually working as HTML. [...]

Are you sure?  The FSF-related xhtml sites seem to render in
'Standards compliance mode' while the Herds site renders in 'Quirks
mode' in Iceweasel.

> XHTML 1.0 and 1.1 do not provide benefits. So, I propose stay with  HTML 4.01 
> Transitional  and cancel the XHTML tasks. David, what do you think?. It seems 
> it would be a lot of work to no benefit.

I disagree with this.  It is not news that some proprietary browsers
are broken, but we should not prolong the browser wars by avoiding
7-year-old good standards like xhtml.  Using xhtml also can have some
other benefits for automated tools, amongst other things.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, trainer, koha dev,
online shop maker, GNU/Linux, debian, gobo, gnustep, mailing lists.
Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/