By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,395 Members | 1,882 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,395 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

XHTMLizer, html to xhtml

P: n/a
git
All,

I have been working on a system to support the 'tidy' program to help
convert html to xhtml. The system is a little complex for me to put
together as it involves apache/php/linux and a windows daemon doing the
conversion, help and email systems.

I would be very grateful of anyone who would be prepared to give it a
quick try and see if it works for them.

BTW - this is a free service and it will stay free!

http://www.nerds-central.com/XHTMLizer/XHTMLizer.php

Thanks

AJ

--
Nerds-Central:
nerds-central.blogspot.com

Feb 27 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
10 Replies


P: n/a
git <gi*@cubicalland.comwrote:
>I have been working on a system to support the 'tidy' program to help
convert html to xhtml.
Wrong way round, had it worked the other way you might have had
something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person.

--
Spartanicus
Feb 27 '07 #2

P: n/a
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:24:48 +0000
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalidwrote:
git <gi*@cubicalland.comwrote:
I have been working on a system to support the 'tidy' program to help
convert html to xhtml.

Wrong way round, had it worked the other way you might have had
something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person.
You can convert either way with a variety of tools, from commandline
(e.g. Tidy, xmllint, htnorm) to GUI (e.g. AccessValet) to built
into the webserver (e.g. mod_proxy_html). Your choice.
--
Nick Kew

Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/
Feb 27 '07 #3

P: n/a
Nick Kew <ni**@grimnir.webthing.comwrote:
>Wrong way round, had it worked the other way you might have had
something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person.

You can convert either way with a variety of tools, from commandline
(e.g. Tidy, xmllint, htnorm) to GUI (e.g. AccessValet) to built
into the webserver (e.g. mod_proxy_html). Your choice.
Personally I would have rated something like AccessValet slightly higher
than "something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person",
but since it's creator doesn't, who am I to argue.

--
Spartanicus
Feb 27 '07 #4

P: n/a
git
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:22:09 +0000, Spartanicus wrote:
Nick Kew <ni**@grimnir.webthing.comwrote:
>>Wrong way round, had it worked the other way you might have had
something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person.

You can convert either way with a variety of tools, from commandline
(e.g. Tidy, xmllint, htnorm) to GUI (e.g. AccessValet) to built
into the webserver (e.g. mod_proxy_html). Your choice.

Personally I would have rated something like AccessValet slightly higher
than "something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person",
but since it's creator doesn't, who am I to argue.
Why do people want to convert xhtml to html?

AJ

--
Cubical Land:
www.cubicalland.com
Nerds-Central:
nerds-central.blogspot.com

Feb 28 '07 #5

P: n/a
Scripsit git:
Why do people want to convert xhtml to html?
Hang around and you'll see explanations about HTML being the language that
works on the Web.

Besides, much of what people call xhtml is just a mixture of correct HTML,
tag soup HTML, XHTML features, and various syntactic and semantic errors.
Cleaning it up to produce HTML makes much more sense than trying to turn it
into XHTML.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Feb 28 '07 #6

P: n/a
On Feb 28, 9:36 am, git <g...@cubicalland.comwrote:
Why do people want to convert xhtml to html?
Support for HTML is rather better then for XHTML (Internet Explorer
still holds a not insignificant share of the market).

(And XHTML as text/html is an ugly hack)

Feb 28 '07 #7

P: n/a
git <gi*@cubicalland.comwrote:
>Why do people want to convert xhtml to html?
Hopefully because they acquired a clue after slavishly and foolishly
following the fallacy that is XHTML1.x.
http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm

XHTML2 on the other hand is widely considered to be still born, there is
no indication that anyone is considering implementing it, and it doesn't
offer the solutions to real world problems that authors want. It can be
argued that it isn't even possible to implement XHTML2 since as
currently planned XHTML2 shares a namespace with XHTML1. Combined this
results in the conclusion that XHTML has virtually nothing to offer in
terms of moving things forward.

In contrast the WhatWG is in the process of extending HTML with real
world features that authors do need and want. This draft proposal is
known as Web Applications 1.0 aka HTLM 5 [1]. In contrast with XHTML2,
features from HTML 5 have already been implemented by some major
browsers, and unlike XHTML 2 HTML 5 has gathered considerable interest
and support from the author community. Reluctantly W3C now seems to have
accepted that HTML could be the way forward [2].

[1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/
[2] http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/166

--
Spartanicus
Feb 28 '07 #8

P: n/a
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:22:09 +0000
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalidwrote:
Nick Kew <ni**@grimnir.webthing.comwrote:
Wrong way round, had it worked the other way you might have had
something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional person.
You can convert either way with a variety of tools, from commandline
(e.g. Tidy, xmllint, htnorm) to GUI (e.g. AccessValet) to built
into the webserver (e.g. mod_proxy_html). Your choice.

Personally I would have rated something like AccessValet slightly
higher than "something vaguely resembling useful for the occasional
person", but since it's creator doesn't, who am I to argue.
:-)

Well, the conversion isn't the main function of any of the
things I mentioned. I just meant to say, there's no shortage
of tools for the job. They all serve other purposes.

--
Nick Kew

Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/
Feb 28 '07 #9

P: n/a
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, git wrote:
Why do people want to convert xhtml to html?
Why do people want to convert HTML to XHTML?

--
In memoriam Alan J. Flavell
http://groups.google.com/groups/sear...Alan.J.Flavell
Feb 28 '07 #10

P: n/a
git wrote :
Why do people want to convert xhtml to html?

AJ
Why would people want to serve XHTML as text/html? Why people serve
XHTML as text/html when the spec recommends to serve it as
application/xhtml+xml? Why Internet Explorer 7 is not able to support
content-type application/xhtml+xml?

No to XHTML
http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm

Beware of XHTML
http://www.webdevout.net/articles/beware_of_xhtml.php

Sending XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful
http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml

XHTML is dead
http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archiv.../xhtml-is-dead

XHTML's Dirty Little Secret
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html

XHTML - What's the point?
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/xhtml-the-point/

XHTML is not for Beginners
http://lachy.id.au/log/2005/12/xhtml-beginners

Why people want to convert HTML into XHTML when all they should be doing is
- first try to create a clear separation between content and
presentation/styling
- then write their markup code and CSS code without validation errors
- make their webpage truly accessible, easy to use
- make their markup code semantically correct, striving to be conformant
to the spec

Gérard
--
Using Web Standards in your Web Pages (Updated Dec. 2006)
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs...your_Web_Pages
Mar 1 '07 #11

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.