XHTML 1.0 Strict compliancy

[DPK]

On that general topic, with XHTML2 MIME types become increasingly important as the imag tag and a few other are replaced with the object tag. Eg -

Code: Select all

<img src="/path/to/img.png" alt="Cool image" />
<!-- becomes this -->
<object type="image/png" src="/path/to/img.png" alt="Cool image" />

IMO this is cool that stuff is being simplified, but the file size of code to transfer is increasing in this example. Great...

[Roberdin]

I think it's become more complex actually.

The <img> tag is pretty simple, but having <object> tags will confuse newbies no end, having to specify the type of image, etc

[DoD]

I dont understand why the best way of doing something has to be replaced?

Btw, what is XHTML really used for??

[Roberdin]

They're using it here. It's really just a way to ensure everything looks the same on all different browsers.

[SHS`]

I dont understand why the best way of doing something has to be replaced?

Btw, what is XHTML really used for??

<img> was depreciated in HTML4 Strict, and XHTML1.0 being a reformulation of HTML4 using XML syntax, <img /> was also depreciated.

<object> works just fine in every current browser except IE, and superceeds not only <img /> but also <iframe> where type becomes "text/html", "text/xml", "application/xml" or "application/xhtml+xml".

It is rather amusing for an HTML browser to choke with an error of not being able to load an object of the type "text/html"... a dust bunny to the person who correctly guesses which browser it is...

[psoTFX]

The worlds most popular?

[SHS`]

The worlds most popular?

Typically only out of ignorance.

/me emails psoTFX a dust bunny

[Roberdin]

Well you've convinced me to use it

[Trek]

Use what? XHTML?
(Plus, I didn't know <img /> was depracated I still be using img.)

[Roberdin]

The object tag instead of the img tag.