[TYPO3-dev] RFC: Change roadmap for 4.5 and 5.0

[Dimitri Tarassenko]

Michael,

On 4/10/06, Michael Scharkow <mscharkow at gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi Christopher, I remember we've had this discussion before, but
> nonetheless...

> I don't deny that HTML 4.0 is a current standard (btw. what would be an
> indication of it being deprecated then?),

a) when the browser currently used by 80% of web users will understand
application/xhtml+xml as MIME type

b) when the browser currently used by 80% of web users will stop
adding a space when you use <br /> as a tag

c) when Mozilla/Safari XHTML renderer will support incremental
rendering like HTML one does and when it will work faster than the
HTML one

d) when web designers stop using document.write(); and <iframe>s

e) when http://www.google.com validates as XHTML.

f) all of the above, i.e. *NEVER* :)))))


> but I don't see any
> *practical* relevance for supporting it. How many sites have you seen
> recently that *required* HTML 4 in favour of XHTML? And vice versa? See
> my point?

No. I haven't seen ONE site yet that required XHTML and that could not
do something in HTML that was doable with XHTML. (A wish of web
designed to brag to other Slashdot drones that their website is W3C
standards compliant does not count as technical necessity).

> While I'd prefer a simple *and* performant way to switch *all* output
> from X to HTML, I don't see one. And in this situation I'd prefer to
> only support XHTML in core.

I'm sorry, I was always under impression that the core was not relying
on any specific output format, and it was in the templates where we
chose to either do HTML, XHTML, WAP-compatible layouts or plain text?
What am I missing?

If you are talking about making the _BackEnd_ XHTML-compatible - I
don't see this making any sense at all. BE redesign should focus more
on speeding up by using more AJAX and the likes, and whether it is
HTML or XHTML - who cares???

--
Dimitri Tarassenko