BBC website now entirely valid XHTML 1.0 Strict

[Dylan Parry]

I come back from holiday to find that the BBC now validates XHTML 1.0
[…]
Is this the way to go? Not HTML 4.01 strict?

Nope, total waste of time in my opinion. If you’re not already using
XHTML 1.0 (or 1.1) then don’t bother changing to it now. It’s especially
pointless, as I see it, now that the XHTML 2.0 spec has been abandoned
by the W3C and as a language XHTML is no longer in development by them.
That said, as a *syntax* XHTML will live on with HTML5 as that allows
both HTML and XHTML syntax to be used depending on the author’s preference.

So, to sum up, stick with HTML 4.01 strict if that’s what you’re using
now, but familiarise yourself with the syntax of XHTML as you may prefer
to use that when HTML5 is better supported and it becomes time to start
seriously looking into using it.

 

[Dylan Parry]

I come back from holiday to find that the BBC now validates XHTML 1.0
[…]
Is this the way to go? Not HTML 4.01 strict?

Nope, total waste of time in my opinion. If you’re not already using
XHTML 1.0 (or 1.1) then don’t bother changing to it now. It’s especially
pointless, as I see it, now that the XHTML 2.0 spec has been abandoned
by the W3C and as a language XHTML is no longer in development by them.
That said, as a *syntax* XHTML will live on with HTML5 as that allows
both HTML and XHTML syntax to be used depending on the author’s preference.

So, to sum up, stick with HTML 4.01 strict if that’s what you’re using
now, but familiarise yourself with the syntax of XHTML as you may prefer
to use that when HTML5 is better supported and it becomes time to start
seriously looking into using it.