Document Type Definition

In the migration from HTML web design to XML based design, why wouldn't one choose to skip XHTML and go straight to the source, cut the middle-man and code content in XML?

It may come as a surprise or shock to hear this, just when we all thought that XHTML was the happy in-between buggy, irregular and bad HTML, and the neat, orderly, structurally valid XML. Many web designers have come to like the comfort ease of use that one finds in HTML. Besides the short-comings of badly structured HTML and the mix of presentational and layout markup (Believe me, we all know some web designers who refuse to embrace semantic markup and CSS), we can all admit to have liked the forgiving nature of HTML.

It is not more or less a universally accepted fact that HTML 4.x and its predecessors are not future-compatible enough to be used in creating valid and stable web content that is accessible, and that stays faithful to the web content presentation architecture of separating content from design, from mark-up.

XHTML in its various flavours of Transitional, Strict, and to a lesser extent Frameset are quickly becoming the standard markup languages for web content. XHTML is a representation of XML, and when valid, it is as good as any other XML document that is built upon a valid DTD especially when well written, strict and valid.

Client-side XML

XML, the term and the technology is talk about and used almost everywhere. It is thought and talked about by everyone. It is now arguably the de-facto method for presenting and exchanging data between applications, disparate technologies and products. Most of the noise is being made about server-side or inter and intra-application interfacing. for client-side use, this is mostly installed applications.

Making a case for Client-side XML

As a subset of XML, XHTML by definition and characteristics complies with formatting and structural architecture of XML. Technically,XHTML is XML. It even has a DTD (Document Type Definition). If browsers support XHTML, the it supports XML. Through my trials and research, I have found that more browser versions support XML, than these that support CSS 2.x . It is ironic that CSS is more widely used than XML markup, yet they at least have the same support. It should therefore makes sense for anyone who prefers pure XML for markup to go ahead and markup his/her content in XML as opposed to XHTML, and much less in HTML.

This document is one of many that discuss the use of XML in Web Design