HTML vs. XHTML on standards compliant websites
For the last few years there’s been a recurring debate on whether we should use XHTML vs. HTML among those of us who care enough about markup to ask ourselves such questions.
Sean Fraser has taken a look at fifty standards compliant websites to find out which doctype they use. He presents the results (which, not surprisingly, show that the vast majority of the examined sites use XHTML) along with a discussion in Why XHTML™?.
Sean concludes the article by stating his reasons for currently using HTML 4.01 Strict:
- XHTML 1.0 is not forward compatible; XHTML 2.0 will not be backwards compatible.
- Serving XHTML as application/xhtml+xml does’t (sic) work in IE.
- HTML 5 purports backwards compatibility.
Only three of the fifty sites Sean examined use HTML 4.01 Strict. This site is one of those three. In the end, my view on HTML vs. XHTML is that it doesn’t really matter. Just remember to write your HTML or HTML compatible XHTML with real XHTML in mind. And use a strict doctype.
Subscribe / follow
- Social Media Summer Internship at PRI (Cranbury, NJ, Ne, US)
- (re)define our guts: FarmersWeb seeking Lead Web Engineer at FarmersWeb, LLC (New York, NY, Ne, US)
- Django Developer (Bristol) at Potato (Bristol, UK, GB)
- Lead Web Applications Developer (PHP) at Use All Five, Inc. (Los Angeles, CA (Venice), Ca, US)
DreamHost web hosting
Use the promo code 456BEREASTREET3 to save USD 20 when you sign up for DreamHost