Bloggin' the web, one post at a time

HTML5 kills XHTML2

The big news last week, well at least to some, is that XHTML 2.0 bites the dust. The W3C has decided to kill the project off. Well, it’s a bit more like tying it to a tree in the woods and driving off.
It seems that they, wisely, considered XHTML2 a waste of time. I couldn’t agree more. What many don’t realise is that XHTML in general had never really made it in any of its incarnations. No point in flogging a dead horse/media type.

2009-07-06 / 12:31

3 Comments

By rany
07/09/2009 11:46 PM
Caribbean
Nice artcile,
thank you,
I like your opinion:
a designer / developer won't care anyway,
but of course, it is nice to see a better version of HTML that is more strict than the madness we've seen before.
By Stomme poes
07/10/2009 02:37 PM
Nederland
I notice you have a lot of HTML5 stuff on your page, except not the shortened charset/content-type tag. Any reason?

So long as HTML5 doesn't *force* any of us to list things like "color" in the markup, it doesn't matter to me and likely not to most us really.

I'm going to continue writing HTML4.01 Strict for a long time, like most of us are going to continue doing.

You know that sport where you run on a barrel floating down a river? Yeah, that's not a sport for me. Undetermined specs can be fun to play with, like some of CSS3, but what we crave is stability. Maybe the official end of XHTML2 can speed up the maturation of HTML5.
By Egor Kloos
07/10/2009 02:51 PM
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Europe, Earth etc...
On projects I tend to stick to the path of least confusion and get everybody to adhere to the doctype used. These generally tend to appear only in two types. XHTML 1.0 transitional and HTML4 strict.

@Stomme Poes
No reason for the old skool charset tag. So I replaced it with the short HTML5 tag. Tnx for the heads up.

I don't normally use HTML5, it's just not ready for clients. For this blog I thought I'd give it a whirl.
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.