HTML/JavaScript obsessives wanted

You are reading a single comment by @bq and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

bq

Sorry, but XHTML 2 is a working draft. Like html 5. It departs from the current HTML standard and utilizes XFORMS, XLINK etc.

XHTML 2 was abandoned in favour of XHTML 5 (xml version of HTML 5). Therefore it has no chance of ever progressing beyond working draft status, and therefore doesn't actually exist.

Just that often reality catches up, and somehow people inject invalid code.
I think to write a site in semantically correct and high standard HTML4 and at a later stage change the doctype to HTML5, revalidate, change minor issues is a realistic scenario for a website.
It also would be future proof. Why mentioning future proof if XHTML 1.0 is where you leave it? That is just current-state proof.

Because internet forum software is a massive hacker target it can, should be, and is in the case of LFGSS, locked down to prevent code injection. It shouldn't be an issue. (Generally I let go when the client signs off. I deliver valid code and if they subsequently fuck it up that's their problem.)
I am not completely against using HMTL 4, but my experience is that encourages sloppy code, because validators let all sorts of shit through and inexperience developers think that is all that matters. Neither am I against the idea of HTML 5, but I think it's too early to rely upon it. If a really good case can be made for choosing HTML 5 for this project then fine, but so far I am not convinced it has been.
I mean future proof because it's a mature standard, and if you stick to standards and specify the right doctype it will continue to be supported long after it is obsolete.
HTML 5 is not future proof because everything is still up for discussion. What is supported now may not continue to be supported by the time the standard is ratified, or may be supported but in a way that breaks code written now.

Is it possible to generate the <!doctype html> thingy with MSXML and the xsl:output directive? With xslt_proc it's just not possible.

It's been a while since I produced XSLT base templates, but from memory, yes, you can put whatever you like as your doctype with an output directive. Most sites I do these days have .Net base templates because of the CMS we use.

Note that the HTML5 doctype is designed by what it does already, which is triggering standards mode regardless to whether it was known at the time the browser was conceived or not.

Whatever name they give it, it cannot be "standards mode" if no standard exists - and for HTML5 it doesn't. It can only be quirks mode until there is a standard to make it compliant with.

HTML 5 is one day going to be very useful, but it's probably a bit early to jump in now.

About

Avatar for bq @bq started