[LINK] XHTML

[Frank O'Connor]

At 11:45 PM +1100 2/2/2000, stephen loosley wrote:
>
>Why it's Important:
>The world of the web is changing, as are the browsers that access 
>it. HTML has needed to change for quite some time in order to keep 
>up, but it didn't have the power to do so. Changing HTML 4.0 into 
>XHTML 1.0 will give it the power it needs to adapt today and to 
>flourish in the future.

Mmm ... having done a few projects that required Web front end, 
back-end database, CGI and various generic tagging and sometimes 
bloody MS extensioning to make the puppies work, I'm all for XML - as 
long as we can get agreements from all the parties to standardize on 
what will and won't be supported. The general availability of 
browsers with STANDARD XML support is another prerequisite.

HTML required some work to become familiar with, and it's been 
through four variants so far ... each of which added new tags and 
facilities, D-HTML and style-sheets wasn't popular when it first 
appeared (and wasn't supported in many browsers) but we took it up 
and used it. It's the field I'm afraid ... things change in it with a 
ferocity and speed that is often astonishing, and being adaptable is 
what it's about.

Failing that ... I more often than not rely on some company to come 
out with the latest and greatest cool WYSIWYG HTML, xHTML or whatever 
editor so I can get up to speed fast and do mosyt of the grunt work 
before I hit the barebones text editor.        ;-)

				Regards,