Big Bad XHTML 2

April 15, 2003 | 5 Comments

Mark Pilgrim is back at it again. I think I understand his feelings, even though I don’t share them. This XHTML 2 stuff is just nothing I consider needing to worrying about. Even though it keeps coming up, both at my day job and online. It is entertaining at times, silly almost. Anyway, for those of you who think this is something you need to “dive into”, Zeldman comes to the rescue with some really great comments, full of common sense:

Many designers will likely ignore XHTML 2 when it is finalized. Many will continue to ignore it as browsers begin to support it. Based on past acceptance speeds, many might well ignore XHTML 2 even when all new browsers and devices support the spec correctly and completely (if that ever happens). They might stop ignoring it only when 98% of their audience sports an XHTML 2 compliant browser or device. And even then, they might continue to use XHTML 1 or HTML 4 it if they find XHTML 2 too difficult to work with or insufficiently beneficial relative to the difficulty of transition…
…There is reason to wonder whether you will ever use XHTML 2 but there is no reason to worry about it – unless you are a browser or device maker who has to figure out whether, how, and when to support it.

Amen brother. Considering how many designers and developers out there in the real world (I think the majority) who haven’t a clue what XHTML is at all, worrying about XHTML 2 is just silly.

Filed under: Web Development

Comments

1. Dave S. said:

I think of this whole issue as only something I may have to deal with one day, years down the road. As Jeffrey made perfectly clear, the working committee seems to be resistant to all attempts at backwards compatibility, so there’s no way it will catch on in the mainstream ANY time soon. First comes browser support, then comes the early adopters, and finally comes general acceptance. Given the historic implementation curve on, say, CSS-1, we can almost assume this to be later than 2010 or so…

XHTML 1.1 and CSS-2 are where it’s at for the next 5 years. They’re mostly backwards-compatible (to the point of looking like trash, but remaining usable) so I see no reason not to fully embrace them, and worry about XHTML 2.0 if and when it’s anything more than theoretical.

Hell, it’s still a working draft, it’s not even a formal recommendation yet.

Posted on April 15, 2003 02:26 PM | #

2. Keith said:

No doubt. It’s funny. Here in Microsoft Country (your close right, Dave, Vancouver right?) many, many developers and designers I know are still fairly unfamaliar with XHTML at all. Let alone talking about anything but the most simple CSS, Web stardards or anything like that.

Think real world folks, working in the trenches. With FrontPage. haha. You know, the traditional graphic designer who does “home pages”. They’re still alive and kicking and many still haven’t made the full on dive into (pun intended) the geeky Web world yet. “Doctype, WTF is that?” Yeah…them.

They don’t use XHTML on a day to day basis, if at all, that’s for sure. Bless their hearts.

I wonder what the percentage of XHTML (valid or invalid) pages are to the rest is, and really how many developers and designers actually use it as of now. Sounds like a survey opp.

Posted on April 15, 2003 05:47 PM | #

3. Dave S. said:

Yep, within spitting distance of Redmond. Same deal up here. A lot of people are perfectly content to spit out code that works in their browser, screw the code. Then it’s all panic and surprise when someone using the newest Opera can’t read a single thing on the site they’ve built.

I find a lot of the print designers building ‘home pages’ are more inclined to go the Fireworks route — pull everything into a program, do a bunch of image slicing, and let the GIFs do the talking. Accessi-what?

I think what makes it worse around here, anyway, is that we have an incredible volume of these insufferable “internet diploma” mills that spit out people in no way ready to do anything but simple copying and pasting day to day. These programs spend a year covering everything from “this is a <P> tag” to Flash to ColdFusion to Illustrator to 3D Studio and back again. It’s unreal just how many there are, and how little they do to equip anyone with valuable skills. The flood of these resumes that most companies around here get tend to completely drown the decent resumes.

I think knowledge of proper coding technique is what is going to start separating the good coders from the wanna-be’s who treat this whole thing with less than respect. A guy who knows a bit of Photoshop who relies on ImageReady for his HTML? Next. A guy who lives in Photoshop and can code from HTML 4.0 right through to XHTML 1.1? When can you start?

This is all theoretical, naturally. I haven’t been in the job market in a long while, so my perceptions are only based on other designers’ experience.

Posted on April 15, 2003 09:25 PM | #

4. Keith said:

That is so funny you mention the “internet diploma” programs up there. A gal from my work was just sent up there to learn Flash and Dreamweaver to help her with building of some online courseware. I don’t know much more than that, I don’t really work with her, only that it seemed cheap, quick and maybe a bit too easy.

Posted on April 15, 2003 10:22 PM | #

5. Dave S. said:

Hmm. Hard to say without knowing where she ended up, but generally you can tell these programs by their syllabus… Non-accredited, one year, “internet diplomas” (worded like that, or similar) are the genre I’m talking about.

What’s really ridiculous is that it’s not just the big schools (and little ones) that offer them - special “internet” schools have sprung up specifically to cater to the niche, and make a buck.

The people who succeed in them are people who have existing skills, I find. So if it’s worth the ridiculous money to get a bit of exposure to all the software out there, I suppose it’s worth their time. But more often the grads of these programs come out thinking they should have nice cushy jobs… not so.

Again, my main problem with the programs are that they pump out too many people into an already crowded marketplace, and drown out the real talent. I’d be surprised if Vancouver is the only city where this is happening.

Posted on April 16, 2003 08:13 AM | #