[wp-hackers] WP issues

Otto otto at ottodestruct.com
Mon Jun 4 20:35:01 GMT 2007

On 6/4/07, Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar at googlemail.com> wrote:
> But why does the marketplace require XHTML at all? XHTML served as
> text/html brings absolutely no advantages over HTML, but gives one
> major disadvantage — you become reliant on browser error handling for
> the XHTML to parse.

There are a thousand debates all over the internet regarding XHTML vs.
HTML. Go find your own reasoning.

As for me, I like something with a bit of structure to it. And as soon
as the major browser works with the correct MIME type, I intend to use
it. In the meantime, simple validation is good enough for me. Thus the
whole "Transitional" phase.

Also, every major browser renders valid XHTML much the same way (with
only minor differences). Switching to the right MIME type doesn't make
any difference in the browsers that do support it, other than speed of

> No, I'm criticising WP for using a transitional DOCTYPE and not a
> strict one.

The most widely used browser in the world doesn't support XHTML *at
all*, and you're questioning the use of Transitional vs. Strict? I
think you need a healthy dose of perspective here... One step at a
time, yeah?

While you correctly pointed out that Wordpress does hardcode some
minimal form in some places, I will point out that you can very easily
switch any given theme to Strict or even to XHTML 1.1 if you like.
I've done it before, although I ended up switching back to
transitional for the time being. It's just simpler to deal with for

Heck, most online systems that give out code to post in your blog
(Google Video, YouTube, etc) don't even give you valid *HTML* code...
I think Wordpress is doing pretty good and pushing forward on the
standards front.

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list