[wp-docs] [Fwd: Re: Semantic HTML Tutorial]

[Craig Hartel]

Interesting comments, Scott. From my perspective I have jumped onto the
XHTML bandwagon for several reasons, and I think that until XML or its
derivative becomes the de facto standard, then it's worth doing.

I wouldn't argue with anyone about the power of XML versus anything else
going today. At my place of work, XML and GML together help us humans manage
the largest spatial database in the world. As with most things, however,
perception plays a much bigger role than does reality; and in the web world,
even more so. Since becoming involved with web logging in general, just this
past November, I see a lot of people emulating the look, feel, and
functionality of many popular sites. "Everybody" wants all the badges;
"everybody" wants to be able to post the validation graphics. This is not to
put anybody down. As with most things, people need to follow a leader for a
while until they get on their own feet and figure things out. Then you start
seeing sites that more closely reflect the personality of its author or
authors. In the process of playing "follow the leader," many of these folks
have strayed into the arena of forward-thinking. They start to realise that
it would be a good idea to more closely follow a set of standards.

Nobody can claim that XHTML is the destination for all this web stuff. It's
a means to an end. If, by wanting to look like the "cool" blogging sites,
semantic mark-up and the concept of standardization get drilled into the
minds of newbies like myself, then how can that be a bad thing? It should,
in fact, make the transition to XML that much easier in the future. If
people can't adopt a simple set of rules like XHTML, then they will have a
much tougher time moving their sites into the 21st Century web.

It's far from perfect, but perhaps it will have the cumulative effect of a
butterfly flapping its wings...

Craig Hartel
Nuclear Moose.