Malware and Threads

[Aractus]

^ Then you're not writing your code properly. HTML and XML and CSS is the easiest code to write in the world.

[LastPoet]

Haha, you called that 'code' LOL

ETA: HTML, CSS & XML is markup.

[Aractus]

It has to be decoded, so yes it's code. Markup is still code FYI.

[LastPoet]

If you say so

[Tiberius]

^ Then you're not writing your code properly. HTML and XML and CSS is the easiest code to write in the world.

HTML, XML, and CSS are very easy to write. Which is why most people are surprised at how badly I.E. parses it. I.E. does not have a very good history with web language standards. Any decent web developer will tell you this.

It has to be decoded, so yes it's code. Markup is still code FYI.

Erm...it doesn't have to be "decoded". It's not that kind of code. It has to be parsed. HTML is not "encoded" in any non-generic way unless you are making websites in foreign languages.

---

Case in point, I still see websites using the I.E only <!--[if ...]> syntax to help get around parser glitches.

[Aractus]

Oh please, any decent web designer uses XML and not HTML. For example my blog:

http://blog.aractus.com/

100% XML. Here's the proof:

http://schneegans.de/sv/?url=http://blog...com/?xhtml

I still have to be able to deliver an HTML-friendly version of it though for "legacy browsers" (ie browsers that can read HTML but not XML).

No go and find me other examples of webmasters using XML instead of HTML. Oh wait, all your "decent web developers" are using HTML aren't they?

[LastPoet]

[Tiberius]

Oh please, any decent web designer uses XML and not HTML. For example my blog:

http://blog.aractus.com/

100% XML. Here's the proof:

http://schneegans.de/sv/?url=http://blog...com/?xhtml

I still have to be able to deliver an HTML-friendly version of it though for "legacy browsers" (ie browsers that can read HTML but not XML).

No go and find me other examples of webmasters using XML instead of HTML. Oh wait, all your "decent web developers" are using HTML aren't they?

That's XHTML, not XML.

Your validator even says so: "Validated as: XHTML 1.0 Transitional".

XML isn't a good language for making websites in, because it is not designed for making websites. It's designed to create arbitrary data structures which can be parsed easily, which is why XHTML uses it from a structural point of view.

To make a website in pure XML, you need to have a corresponding XSL and then use XSL transformations (XSL) on the data stored in the XML document. That is great if you have a lot of similar data that you want to display in a standard manner, but it is not good to use if you want different areas of a web application, like a header, sidebars, content, footer, etc.

[Aractus]

XHTML is XML (it isn't HTML). That's why the first line of the document is this:

Code:

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>

It loads much faster in all browsers that support it than HTML does. You would know this if you were a decent web developer.

[LastPoet]

OMG, Tibs isn't a decent web developer, someone hand me the popcorn

Clearly you don't know what that header means.