Should I Convert Site To XHTML or XHTML mobile?

[chronos3d]

I'm designing a site for a restaurant and want to insure it's code is
up to date. I've read that new sites should be written in XHTML... and
I've coverted the site to XHTML 1.1. But there's also an option for
XHTML mobile 1.0. I tried it and it also displays properly in IE. I'm
interested in the mobile aspect since one never knows if someone with a
wireless device will access the site.

What's the difference? Can XHTML sites be read by wireless browsers
like Blackberry while XHTML mobile is only for older WAP phones?

Thanks!

 

[Andy Dingley]

I'm designing a site for a restaurant and want to insure it's code is

I've read that new sites should be written in XHTML..
Wrong.

I've coverted the site to XHTML 1.1.

Well convert it back to HTML 4.01 Strict, like you should have used in
the first place! Or at least convert it back to XHTML 1.0 Strict
Appendix C

there's also an option for XHTML mobile 1.0.

"An option for" suggests that you're using some idiot-tool to make this
site (which you didn't tell us the URL for) rather than understanding
what you're doing.

I'm
interested in the mobile aspect since one never knows if someone with a
wireless device will access the site.

That's the point these days - you'll never know. So don't assume and
don't serve mobile-specific formats unless you _know_ you're serving to
a mobile device (i.e. you're working with a mobile networks'
walled-garden servers)

If you're publishing to the public web, just do good-quality valid work
in HTML 4.01 Strict and let the network handle any transcoding needed.
Obviously this means a good fluid design too, not <table>s and pixels.

 

[a human person]

Well convert it back to HTML 4.01 Strict, like you should have used in
the first place! Or at least convert it back to XHTML 1.0 Strict
Appendix C


"An option for" suggests that you're using some idiot-tool to make this
site (which you didn't tell us the URL for) rather than understanding
what you're doing.


That's the point these days - you'll never know. So don't assume and
don't serve mobile-specific formats unless you _know_ you're serving to
a mobile device (i.e. you're working with a mobile networks'
walled-garden servers)

If you're publishing to the public web, just do good-quality valid work
in HTML 4.01 Strict and let the network handle any transcoding needed.
Obviously this means a good fluid design too, not <table>s and pixels.

how does one code for mobiles? i hope thats not a stupid question but i have
a feeling it might be.

 

[CptDondo]

how does one code for mobiles? i hope thats not a stupid question but i have
a feeling it might be.

Google for WML

--Yan

 

[Andy Dingley]

how does one code for mobiles?

Same as coding for desktops, only more carefully. If you have a good
fluid design (length units in ems, think about how it resizes for small
windows, make sure it's usable without scrolling far down) then it
"just works".

You don't need to use the moble flavours of XHTML because the network
will transcode to those if it has to and thankfully WAP and WML are
just a bad memory.

 

[a human person]

Same as coding for desktops, only more carefully. If you have a good
fluid design (length units in ems, think about how it resizes for small
windows, make sure it's usable without scrolling far down) then it
"just works".

You don't need to use the moble flavours of XHTML because the network
will transcode to those if it has to and thankfully WAP and WML are
just a bad memory.

ahhh very good sir. thankyou.

 

[chronos3d]

how does one code for mobiles? i hope thats not a stupid question but i have
a feeling it might be.

In Dreamweaver there's an option to convert pages to variants of HTML
or XHTML. Should you have DW, go to FILE then CONVERT.

 

[the red dot]

In Dreamweaver there's an option to convert pages to variants of HTML
or XHTML. Should you have DW, go to FILE then CONVERT.

erk sadly or luckily i dont use dreamweaver. thanks anyway.

 

[kdarling]

You don't need to use the moble flavours of XHTML because the network
will transcode to those if it has to and thankfully WAP and WML are
just a bad memory.

WAP 1.0 had transcoders, but XHTML-MP (Mobile Profile) is used in
devices that connect directly to the internet. For example, a lot of
Verizon cell phones use the Openwave 6.2 browser. If you want to see
how your site looks on one of those devices, download the simulator at:


http://developer.openwave.com/dvl/tools_and_sdk/phone_simulator/index.htm

Also go to the link at right for Phone Simulator Documentation, and get
the XHTML-MP and CSS Reference under the Development Guides section.
One big site design note: this browser does't support any scripting
yet.

There's also a free standalone Windows Mobile simulator, but I don't
have the link offhand.

Usually people don't design their pages to work on both powerful and
limited devices at the same time. Instead they will redirect limited
devices to another version of their site.

Regards, Kevin

 

[Andy Dingley]

WAP 1.0 had transcoders, but XHTML-MP (Mobile Profile) is used in
devices that connect directly to the internet.

This starts to get awfully network-dependent (still, although less than
it used to be) but the networks that support "free range" web access to
http://*.internet:80 in general still have some level of proxying or
transcoding in situ. For one thing, they'll resize images. They may
pass HTML-like content through if it looks acceptable, but for most of
it (how else are you going to browse the general web?) it'll transcode
from tag soup into XHTML-MP first

XHTML-MP is an important issue if you're dealing with networks or
handsets, but you don't need to code in it for a public site and it
will still get mobile access from many devices and networks.