[whatwg] Re: OT: (X)HTML and design of site

Malcolm Rowe malcolm-what at farside.org.uk
Mon Jul 19 09:58:14 PDT 2004

Sime Ramov writes:
> Why did you decided to go with HTML 4.01 instead of with XHTML?
> Everyone's talking about benefits with XHTML and you decided to stay
> with HTML?

It's unclear whether you're talking about one of the WHATWG specs, or the 
WHATWG site itself. 

Either way, the answer is the same: The browser that currently has the 
largest market share by far does not support XHTML. There is no reason to 
design a site (or spec) around a technology that cannot be used by the 
majority of your readership, when an 'older' technology works perfectly well 
for _all_ readers. 

With regard to the specs themselves, Web Forms 2 extends both HTML and XHTML 
simultaneously; I would imagine that the others will as well. 


More information about the whatwg mailing list