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