XHTML vs. HTML
Posted: 20 February 2010 01:48 AM     [ Ignore ]  
N00b
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2010-02-20

XHTML is HTML in XML, mainly tags and characteristic are the similar as of individuals in HTML. This Article will give details the dissimilarity, as well as momentarily wrap some reimbursement of by means of XHTML.

It is a ordinary misinterpretation that XHTML ought to be cleaner then HTML, XHTML is not any Cleaner then a appropriately coded HTML page. And XHTML do not encourage the utilize of w3c principles to any further extent then appropriately coded HTML previously dose.

Anybody can grasp a tool, but that doesn’t denote they be acquainted with how to utilize it. Proverb that XHTML is cleaner is a excellent sign you don’t recognize how to utilize it. Yes there are a lot of unacceptable HTML pages, but this doesn’t denote each HTML page is illogical.

XHTML is not a substitute of HTML, and HTML will carry on to be reinforcement for a extended time. HTML5 is the after that main account of HTML.

It has been supposed that XHTML will assist to augment your assignment in the serps, but this is not factual. By means of XHTML will not consequence Web Design Los Angeles assignment in the search engines.

There is a small number of code-related dissimilarity; mostly unfilled rudiments needs to be stopped up, in adding rudiments and characteristic must be in lowercase, and characteristic principles must be citation.

Profile
 
Posted: 04 March 2010 09:46 PM   [ # 1 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2010-03-04

XHTML is fundamentally different from HTML, despite looking very similar.

  * XHTML is XML, which means that the syntax rules are slightly different.
  * There are things you can do in XHTML which you cannot do in HTML.
  * There are things you can do in HTML which you cannot do in XHTML.
  * There are differences concerning CSS.
  * There are differences concerning client-side scripting (e.g., JavaScript).
Differences in Syntax Rules

  * XHTML is case-sensitive, HTML is not. All tags and attributes must be lowercase in XHTML.
  * XHTML, being XML, must be well-formed. Every element must have an end tag, or use the
    self-closing   tag syntax. HTML allows some end tags and even some start tags to be omitted.
  * If an XML parser encounters a well-formedness error, it must abort. An SGML or HTML parser is
    expected to try to salvage what it can and keep going.
  * All attributes must have a value in XHTML. HTML allows some attributes (e.g., selected) to be minimised.
  * All attribute values must be surrounded by double or single quotes. HTML allows quotes to be omitted if
    the value contains only alphanumeric characters (and some others).
  * The comment syntax is more limited in XHTML, but that’s rarely an issue for most designers/developers.

Profile
 
Posted: 09 March 2010 07:21 AM   [ # 2 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Hi...I'm New...
Total Posts:  14
Joined  2010-03-09

Hello friends
Using xhtml or htmL makes no difference to browser compatibility, accessibility or SE rankings - it’s the content and how you use the markup that is important.

If you or your visitors need to programatically access your web page content, there are better ways of doing this than using xhtml: e.g. using a database/CMS, providing RSS feeds or a SOAP interface (like Google smile).

The idea that humans and machines should use the same interface (web pages) seems fundamentally flawed to me. Why not design each interface to suit the needs of each audience?

Zeldman’s infamous NYPL “xhtml benefits”:
1. painless transition to xml/“future-proof”
2. Cleaner, more logical [sic] markup
3. Increased interoperability
4. Greater accessibility

Are completely bogus - even Zeldman’s book quietly lost the “Forward Compatibility” from the title…

No-one has found a valid reason for xhtml to exist as yet, let alone a reason for using it wink

Profile
 
Posted: 14 March 2010 11:42 PM   [ # 3 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2010-03-12

Although HTML and XHTML appear to have similarities in their syntax, they are significantly different in many ways XHTML is a fairly close copy of HTML 4.01, so as far as tag functionalities go, so do not expect anything too new and fancy. . Here on this forum its already well discussed regarding the difference of HTML and XHTML.nternet Explorer has no support for documents served as XHTML on any platform, has no support for the XHTML1 namespace in XML, and has in fact no XHTML1 support at all. It has the HTML tag soup support that Appendix C was targetting only.

Profile
 
Posted: 16 July 2010 03:38 AM   [ # 4 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  5
Joined  2010-07-16

There are a number of technical issues with this question, which preclude a simple and short answer. In reality, the latest W3C recommendation with widespread support is HTML 4.01. Unless you actually need any of the features that XHTML offers over HTML, there is no technical reason to use XHTML.

In order to actually benefit from using XHTML, you really need to understand the fundamental differences between XHTML and HTML. Such a site will only be available to a small minority of the surfing population, however.

Some web designers and developers prefer XHTML’s syntax rules over HTML’s. By following certain guidelines, you can use this syntax without technically using XHTML at all (see below). There are a number of potential pitfalls with this approach, but it is a possible way forward for those who absolutely want to type
instead of
.

For ‘future-proofing’ your documents, using a Strict doctype is more important than whether you use XHTML or HTML.

Profile
 
Posted: 30 July 2010 01:38 AM   [ # 5 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2010-07-30

It’s going to be several years before ‘all’ major browsers recognise XHTML, even if Microsoft launches an XHTML-compliant IE8 next year. They tend to require the latest versions of Windows for their ‘upgraded’ versions, and lots of users have neither the means nor the wherewithal to replace Windows 98 with XP or Vista. Depending on your target audience, you’ll probably have to expect a significant share of users with non-XHTML-compliant browsers.

There is absolutely no point in writing XHTML markup if the document doesn’t work when served as an application of XML (to compliant user agents). If you need to serve it as text/html for the foreseeable future, that’s fine. Just make sure that it also works as XHTML. It’s easy to achieve: provide a mechanism for serving it with an XML MIME type and verify in a compliant browser like Opera or Firefox.

If it doesn’t work, you’re relying on HTML-only features and should use HTML markup. Even the ‘future-proofing’ argument loses all validity under those circumstances.

Profile
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 09:03 PM   [ # 6 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  5
Joined  2010-08-05

The difference is that all attribute values must be surrounded by double or single quotes. HTML allows quotes to be omitted if the value contains only alphanumeric characters.The comment syntax is more limited in XHTML, but that’s rarely an issue for most designers.XHTML is case-sensitive, HTML is not. All tags and attributes must be lowercase in XHTML.

Profile
 
Posted: 11 August 2010 06:17 AM   [ # 7 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2010-08-10

I never knew that xhtml was case sensitive that’s probably why I had so many problems. grin

Profile
 
Posted: 09 September 2010 02:11 AM   [ # 8 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Initiation
Total Posts:  35
Joined  2010-09-09

The Full form of html is hypertext markup language and the full form of dhtml is Dynamic HTML. The basic difference between the html and dhtml is…html is static and dhtml is dynamic.

Profile
 
Posted: 10 September 2010 02:34 AM   [ # 9 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  6
Joined  2010-09-03

The major diffrence between Html and Xhtml is that in HTML element names are case insensitive while in XHTML element names are case sensitive and lower-case.
In XHTML every element must have an end tag while HTML allows some end tags and even some start tags to be omitted.

Profile
 
Posted: 13 September 2010 09:27 PM   [ # 10 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Initiation
Total Posts:  23
Joined  2010-08-26

XHTML is standard now a day it is adopted by may webmaster to develop web page. It is broadly supported by all browser in this world.

Profile
 
Posted: 23 September 2010 03:48 AM   [ # 11 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
N00b
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2010-09-23

Well, I think HTML quickly be replaced by XHTML. The differences are very small, but the results of switching can be useful, the margin of error in the HTML is much wider than in XHTML, where the rules are very clear. XHTML documents must use lower case for all element names and attributes of HTML

Profile
 
Posted: 23 September 2010 07:05 AM   [ # 12 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  5
Joined  2010-09-23

Some of the differences between XHTML and HTML are :
XHTML is a fairly close copy of the HTML.
HTML names do not matter, while the names of XHTML is case-sensitive.
There are many things that are XHTML can do but HTML can not are as following:
Use CDATA sectionswith lots of literal characters that otherwise need to be escaped.
Use PIs

Profile
 
Posted: 23 September 2010 07:24 AM   [ # 13 ]     [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]  
I've Only Posted Once!
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2010-09-20

XHTML is fundamentally different from HTML, despite looking very similar.

Profile