When Netscape 4 and Explorer 4 implemented CSS, their support did not match the W3C standard (or each other). It's a feature! Will that avoid quirks mode? I’m working on a replacement. navigate here
As the file system doesn't indicate the MIME type, it's neccessary to make some assumptions and what you've detailed makes sense. The behavioural target attribute is also gone. However, to conform to the Polyglot Markup Guidelines for HTML-Compatible XHTML Documents, it should be written in lowercase. Kinda frustrating because it seems like many books, professors, and other folks have taught me to code using XHTML dtd.
Cates wrote on 21st June 2010 at 21:15: Mathias: I think what Kevin is trying to say is that the HTML5 spec allows for malformed XML so it becomes difficult to Join Date Jun 2005 Location Madrid Beans 212 DistroUbuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat Re: Parse error when adding XML declaration in a PHP script I thought it was something like this, but If I wasn’t using XML I’d be unable to parse my conversions. MathML?
Read this: http://www.xmlplease.com/xhtml/xhtml5polyglot/ Anonymous wrote on 7th February 2012 at 10:17: I wholeheartedly agree with avoiding XHTML (any version). Thanks for making my case! one of them is considered html.. Xml Error Finder Any tips or suggestions or solutions?
You signed out in another tab or window. How To Solve Xml Parsing Error I’m sure all browsers anyone uses checks the doctype in a case-insensitive manner, and yet, I wonder what reason there could be to buck the trend? When Mozilla sees the file extension, it assumes the document will be XHTML, *and treats it as if it were XML, not HTML*, because not all XHTML can be classified as If I’m wrong it’s my right, but please do tell me, I’m trying to learn something here.
Lol, ok.... How To Correct Xml Parsing Error You’ve been talking about XHTML all this time, but what you really mean is “HTML with a stricter syntax”. Compilers never guess what I meant, they do exactly what I write. Since you have served your XHTML markup as HTML, there will be no difference at all.
It was previously not suggested, but it was still valid. mhulse said: I guess a better question is this: What is wrong with the examples I provided? How To Fix Xml Parsing Error marcopolo ---Blog | Photography | Sydney | Celebrities | Best Designed Drupal Websites | Share Trading | Log in or register to post comments I just answered my own Marco Palmero Syntaxerror Syntax Error Doctype Html Since browser support for CSS was fairly poor at the time, many designers interpreted 'transitional' as a transitional phase until CSS compliance was better, but I don't think that's what W3C
When does Depala's ability happen? http://thatcom.net/xml-parsing/xml-parsing-error-syntax-error-location-moz-null.html I was wondering how I could convert or transfer my html files to xhtml, or should I just re-rewrite or revamp the whole thing. Glad there are folks like you spreading the word. why? Syntaxerror: Expected Expression, Got '<'
P.P.S. A.J. The points, you are missing them. his comment is here Ramon wrote on 7th July 2011 at 18:50: Hello, I am fairly new to web development and trying to understand the differences between HTML5 and XHTML5, I arrived to this post.
I can guarantee you that. Xml Parser Error Youtube Sample content:
Some HTMLComment 1 Christopher Hoess (gone) 2001-12-20 17:10:19 PST AutisticCuckoo 2007-07-26 11:19:50 UTC #7 mhulse said: I do not think I have ever seen a true XML XHTML strict document.
Cates wrote on 21st June 2010 at 20:05: I agree with Austin. You are serious? You will get away with this practice if you serve your documents as HTML, but that means you require your XHTML to be served as HTML, which is harmful. *) You Doctype Html Syntax Error Python Mathias wrote on 24th June 2010 at 20:49: A.J.
I can understand what you're saying and am happy to go with that approach. Comment 10 Hixie (not reading bugmail) 2002-05-25 14:26:14 PDT VERIFIED INVALIDish Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug. Why is this C++ code faster than my hand-written assembly for testing the Collatz conjecture? weblink mhulse 2007-07-27 02:58:34 UTC #9 Just thought I would post a couple of examples of confusing info to me: http://forum.mootools.net/viewtopic.php?id=1673&p=3#post-21696 A couple of things.
Allow me to quote myself here: “Note that technically, Facebook isn’t using XHTML either; they’re serving their documents with a text/html MIME type.” Austin: “Inline SVG is kind of ugly in Just because SGML syntax is more fault-tolerant doesn’t mean it’s easier to read or write. Made me use very very lazy HTML, that I had to fix when I switched to Linux. (\ /) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. get confused as php tags by the parser, you have to print or echo the xml line.
Don’t use XHTML. Thanks for your help. alanhogan commented Feb 23, 2011 Works for me, as long as there’s an intention behind it :) H5BP member jonathantneal commented Feb 23, 2011 On the web, all the other elements I mean, I think I understand why you would consider it wrong/harmful, but...
Mathias wrote on 24th June 2010 at 18:43: A.J. Miller Medeiros wrote on 6th January 2011 at 20:40: I’m also against the XML serialization (serving with the XML MIME type or using the header or .xhtml file extension) DOCTYPE sniffing only applies for documents within the text/html MIME-type. asked 6 years ago viewed 52080 times active 1 year ago Get the weekly newsletter!
Reason: server-side eco-systems heavily rely on XML. Source code form contributions such as patches are considered to be modifications under the Mozilla Public License v2.0. "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners wrote on 4th June 2014 at 20:05: You know, I’ll always prefer HTML over XHTML because it’s much less verbose and I like to keep things simple. It would use the tags and attributes from HTML but forbid common HTML practices that were quirky from an XML standpoint.
mhulse 2007-07-27 02:46:12 UTC #8 Ahhh, thanks for the clarification and tips! I personally prefer HTML 4.01 Strict because it feels more 'honest', but that's just me. Browsers do lenient syntax parsing, but the rendering is still ends up standard compliant. Just so you could validate before starting to replace presentational markup with CSS.