XHTML myths and reality
Tina Holmboe erklärt die Geschichte, Vor- und Nachteile von XHTML. Ganz spannend zu lesen.
If you don’t have any specific need to deliver XML–based structures to the client,
e.g. due to mixing namespaces such as having MathML content in your pages, using
Ruby (XHTML 1.1) or techniques such as ACCESS (XHTML 1.2) then consider whether
you won’t be better off simply by using HTML 4.01 Strict.
Even if it is problematic to deliver XML to clients, there is nothing preventing you from,
for instance, keeping your content in an XML–based language such as XHTML or DocBook
on the server, but transforming into HTML 4.01 Strict before delivery.
If you do want, or need, to use XHTML, consider using the method outlined in
the section on content negotiation
so as not to exclude any visitors.
Consider that while XHTML processed by an HTML parser is, theoretically, still XHTML it
is never treated that way on the client. With this in mind evaluate whether it is cost–effective
for you and your organisation to move towards XML on the client side at this stage.

