Forum Moderators: open
Also, is there a program that can mass convert a site to xhtml in a click or two? :)
edit: one more question: if I have a css class named .pageTitle, with xhtml would that have to be converted to .pagetitle?
Jennifer
I'm told that it is a small step from there to XHTML 1.0, but you are still really just serving up HTML rather than the bigger step into XML even when you do that.
Yes, there are a number of code editors that can do mass conversions to varying degrees. I would suggest however that you focus on your new pages first, and weigh the value of converting legacy pages against returns.
The class .pageTitle is different from .pagetitle -- CSS is case sensitive and does not follow the markup rules assigned to XHTML other than as applied to head/page markup, even here, CSS's case sensitive naming convention is exempt.
You can basicly serve up XHTML 1.0 in two different ways; Either as text/html (HTML MIME type) or application/xhtml+xml (XHTML MIME type). If you serve it up as text/html the browser will still treat your code as HTML. If you use the XHTML MIME type, then yes you're coding HTML in XML. Although using application/xhtml+xml is risky at best, since IE6 doesn't support it, and your page breaks in the rest of the browsers if you made one silly mistake (like forgot that it's supposed to be <br /> and not <br>).
As far as XHTML is concerned though - Don't bother unless you want to display some sort of XML language on your webpages (like MathML), it's just not worth it at this point.
The point is, should XHTML be used in place of HTML? The anwser is a definite yes! At least if forward compatibility and device independence is concerned.
Ignore it? That simply does not make sense at all. The learning curve may be easy, but nothing will supplant familiarity as XHTML 1.0 and XHTML 1.1 are replaced with XHTML 2.0 when the real power of XHTML will be revealed.
Granted, it will be sometime yet, but just as with CSS, would you rather learn it early and find a comfort zone? Or would you prefer to struggle to catch-up to those who have passed you by? The choice is a simple one.
The point is, should XHTML be used in place of HTML? The anwser is a definite yes! At least if forward compatibility and device independence is concerned.
Actually, the point is "Is it worth it to convert HTML to XHTML?" That answer is a little more tricky...
If you think your site would benefit to be viewed on, say, a PDA, then yes, XHTML is the way to go, and it is also the way to go if you want to make your site accessible and/or code for the future. New documents should always be written in XHTML if possible.
With the implementations of today, however, there is hardly any difference between XHTML and HTML syntax-wise and stuff on the desktop side. HTML 4.01 works well enough still, and until IE starts supporting XHTML properly there really is no reason to use it, with the exception of using XHTML together with another form of XML (like MathML), or using it to learn it. Converting XHTML to HTML will save you money in the long run, no doubt about that. But only if you convert to XHTML 2.0 from the start.
Ignore it? That simply does not make sense at all. The learning curve may be easy, but nothing will supplant familiarity as XHTML 1.0 and XHTML 1.1 are replaced with XHTML 2.0 when the real power of XHTML will be revealed.Granted, it will be sometime yet, but just as with CSS, would you rather learn it early and find a comfort zone? Or would you prefer to struggle to catch-up to those who have passed you by? The choice is a simple one.
I'm not saying you should ignore it. But the way I see it, with the implementations and usage of today, there's hardly any real *visible* benefit of converting to XHTML 1.0. Why? Because XHTML 2.0 won't be backwards compatible. Once XHTML 2.0 comes along and browsers start supporting it, then yes, I'd be willing to change to that. But I find it hard to get motivation to convert to XHTML 1.0 when 2.0 will be the language to use. XHTML 1.0 seems to me to be a dead end.
It's like this: I have a site that I've written in HTML. I convert it to XHTML 1.0, and the conversion took maybe two weeks time all in all. Two years later XHTML 2.0 shows up and gets good browser support. I then "must" convert to 2.0, and that also takes time.
Why convert twice (HTML -> XHTML 1 -> XHTML 2) when I can do the jump to XHTML 2 directly? Until XHTML 2 comes along conversion isn't worth it IMO.
