Chris Boulton Wrote:All i'm actually doing is parsing the HTML through the W3C validator, cleaning up the HTML so there are no errors according to the validator, then going through Opera, Firefox and IE to double check its all rendering properly according to those standards.
Matt Light Wrote:What the hell are you talking about? If it loads in the browser correctly then it obviously works in the browser 
Besides... that page is for 6.0.1 and 6.0.2 is out.
Ok, ask your self: "Why was XHTML made?" First and foremost to make it possible to include XML in HTML. Now, if this was a personal web-page I couldn't give a damn (just a few more bits to the HTML) but this is a forum damnit! If you add XHTML here then the general public (who's wise to what XHTML is) would try and use XML in that forum (as a post or in the template) and fail miserably!
So take my suggestion, friends - Stick to HTML 4.01 untill IE supports application/xml and application/xml+xhtml (or atleast untill the majority has converted into using Firefox - shouldn't be a month).
But for those of you who still don't get it:
XHTML + IE = Non-working XHTML
XHTML + Server without application/xml(+xhtml) mime-type = Non-working XHTML (Redundant and pointless - Acts like pure HTML)
To be correct:
XHTML + Real XHTML support (i.e *.xhtml = application/xml+xhtml) on server + XML(+XHTML) supporting web-browser =
Working XHTML
And before you say "But IE supports XHTML" let me just say
NO! The IE engine hasn't been changed in a long time, in fact it stoped changing a long time after XHTML came along.
Not convinced?
Come correct!w3.org - Makers of (X)HTML Wrote:XHTML is a family of current and future document types and modules that reproduce, subset, and extend HTML 4 [HTML4]. XHTML family document types are XML based, and ultimately are designed to work in conjunction with XML-based user agents.
Any comments?
People aren't going to try and use XML inside the HTML, especially of a forum.
Yes, XHTML was made for this purpose but its quickly becoming "the way of the web" along with CSS based designs (using divs and alike).
A considerable amount of work has already gone in to XHTML compliance, and in the future it will only make it easier once its fully supported by all browsers and setups for XML to be added to the files.
The XHTML you see in MyBB is not going to "screw up" over different browsers as its the html layer of XHTML, not XML based. All browsers (even going back to IE 4.0) support it perfectly and having a common (and more recent) document type means that there will be better support for it in browsers, and will render seemlessly in all browsers.
Hihi, it's ok. I was mearly stating the point that I know about (X)HTML
. When a CERTAIN PERSON (the name has been striken from the record to protect the rude) said (and I quote) "Please only talk about something if you know what you're saying". So I had to prove that I know what I'm talking about, and when it comes to web-dev: I grok HTML like J5 groks the mic
And when it comes to that and everything else: I get obsessive (especialy when people claim something negative about me that's not true.)
It was just a suggestion, a healthy observation, and then this certain someone comes along and acts all high and mighty and indirectly calls me ignorant: You know I had to get obsessive on his lime.
Mr.Sonic, I'm sorry for that comment but I really must argue you. XML and XHTML are obviously not the same thing and I know that Internet Explorer has problems with the mime type but it's beside the point here. The XHTML used in MyBB (yes it is XHTML but it's not the way XHTML *should* be served, because IE doesn't support that) doesn't really apply to these problems. I don't understand what your problem is here because there are no problems whatsoever with IE not supporting the XHTML used in MyBB. If you want to discuss IE's crappy rendering and accepting of XHTML then please do that somewhere else and I would agree with you. It may apply somewhere else but definitely not here.
Oh and besides I never actually said that you didn't know what you were talking about... if you take it to the word
Just never mind about this, it doesn't apply to MyBB so it isn't much of a problem really. We all agree IE s*cks...
(
www.spreadfirefox.com)
Quote:Ok, ask your self: "Why was XHTML made?" First and foremost to make it possible to include XML in HTML.
XML is a markup language where everything has to be marked up correctly, which results in "well-formed" documents.
XML was designed to describe data and HTML was designed to display data.
Today's market consists of different browser technologies, some browsers run internet on computers, and some browsers run internet on mobile phones and hand helds. The last-mentioned do not have the resources or power to interpret a "bad" markup language.
Therefore - by combining HTML and XML, and their strengths, we got a markup language that is useful now and in the future - XHTML.
XHTML pages can be read by all XML enabled devices AND while waiting for the rest of the world to upgrade to XML supported browsers, XHTML gives you the opportunity to write "well-formed" documents now, that work in all browsers and that are backward browser compatible.
- From w3schools, I only quote them to avoid having to type it myself.
XHTML will work perfectly in IE, and has been proven to do so.
Quote:"Why was XHTML made?" First and foremost to make it possible to include XML in HTML.
While this is somewhat true, I do not believe that XHTML was made "First and foremost to make it possible to include XML in HTML."
[url Wrote:http://w3c.org/MarkUp/#recommendations[/url]]XHTML 1.0 is the W3C's first Recommendation for XHTML, following on from earlier work on HTML 4.01, HTML 4.0, HTML 3.2 and HTML 2.0. With a wealth of features, XHTML 1.0 is a reformulation of HTML 4.01 in XML, and combines the strength of HTML 4 with the power of XML.
XHTML 1.0 is the first major change to HTML since HTML 4.0 was released in 1997. It brings the rigor of XML to Web pages and is the keystone in W3C's work to create standards that provide richer Web pages on an ever increasing range of browser platforms including cell phones, televisions, cars, wallet sized wireless communicators, kiosks, and desktops.
XHTML 1.0 is the first step and the HTML Working Group is busy on the next. XHTML 1.0 reformulates HTML as an XML application. This makes it easier to process and easier to maintain. XHTML 1.0 borrows elements and attributes from W3C's earlier work on HTML 4, and can be interpreted by existing browsers, by following a few simple guidelines. This allows you to start using XHTML now!
From what I can tell, this means that XHTML is a transition from HTML to XML. Basically, XHTML uses a DTD that conforms to XML standards but browsers that do not support XML still can read the page because the tags are all the same as HTML.
While it is possible to add custom tags, I don't think the main purpose is to allow XML tags in an HTML document. The specification was meant to allow existing web pages to conform to XML so there is not a problem in the future when browsers start to be supportive more of XML than HTML.
Sorry about being so upfront last night ("What the hell are you talking about?"). I still do have to say, though, that XHTML as a transition, not for the addition of XML, is supported by any browser that supports HTML.
Well, Mr.Sonic does have a point. Internet Explorer does not support the xhtml mimetype so it's not *real* xhtml as it should be.
Aren't you missing the whole point? There is nothing 'better' in the sense of versatility, displayability in IE or anything else about XHTML. The difference is that XHTML is a flexible markup - future browsers will be able to make assumptions far better because valid xhtml markup is essentially completely undubious and completely capable of being extended.
So you buy a Mazda, upen the hood, and see a carrot inside. But when you roll the car down a hill it works; Does this also qualify it as "working"?
I stand for what I said since I am a perfectionist, but after carefull discussing the developers of MyBB have decided to keep it that way until IE is XHTML compliant and it's not necessary to upgrade the code. So it works, not correctly, but it works.
I'd hardly describe IE as a mazda but yes, if the browser is a mazda then this carrot is making the car hit top speed, go up and down hills and loop the loops just like any other engine.
Think about it logically:
Not using XHTML = Working in all browsers now, but if a new version of a browser decides to embrace the future and give priority to XHTML then the current pages are screwed.
Using XHTML = Still working in all browsers, even if unexpectedly, but as browsers evolve the pages are fine because they're on a stable, predictable platform.
Anyway, who's gonna get their lime into gear and move into the XHTML era if nobody can be bothered to support it in their pages?