xhtml 2.0 standards

Discussion in 'HTML & Website Design' started by Sapphiro, Jan 21, 2009.

  1. #1
    hey just a question, how many of you guys actually started adopting the recent xhtml 2.0 standards?:) right now i I guess xhtml transitional 1.0 is more or less common, but i think we'll adopt xhtml 2.0 sooner or later, so why not now?:D

    btw incase you wanna know, I think the image tag for xhtml 2.0 is now <img src=" ">your alt text </img>
     
    Sapphiro, Jan 21, 2009 IP
  2. onehundredandtwo

    onehundredandtwo Guest

    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    I thought the W3C was originally trying to push forward the use of the <object> image tag but IE doesn't support it, they must have changed their minds.

    I've always tried following all of the standards available to me, I try to make my website work in as many different standards as possible, but I mainly concentrate on XHTML 1.0 Strict.

    I think XHTML2 is still pretty far away since not all of the browsers (mainly IE) like XHTML2.
     
    onehundredandtwo, Jan 21, 2009 IP
  3. drhowarddrfine

    drhowarddrfine Peon

    Messages:
    5,428
    Likes Received:
    95
    Best Answers:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    Microsoft does not support XHTML at all and has no plans to do so. Plus, I doubt the OP is serving XHTML as xhtml so it does little to no good.

    I'll never understand why anyone is using the transitional doctype for new web pages, too. Makes no sense at all.
     
    drhowarddrfine, Jan 22, 2009 IP
  4. kk5st

    kk5st Prominent Member

    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    376
    Best Answers:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    335
    #4
    I mostly agree, Doc. There are times, though. I've been forced to go the transitional route because of IE's really crappy rendering of imported web pages using the object element, leaving the iframe as the only reasonable way to go.

    cheers,

    gary
     
    kk5st, Jan 22, 2009 IP