[WEB4LIB] Re: What's next after HTML?

[wl-mw at msln.net]

Likewise, I'd like to hear opinion on this, too. Our webpages are all HTML 
(4.01 transitional, I hope) with Cascading Style Sheets governing the layout, 
formatting, decor, etc., except that I don't use some CSS tags because some 
browers don't seem to support them (especially anything "floating"). I know 
nothing about XML and am not especially interested in it unless I have to 
migrate to it. 

Kathy, sorry about your electrical, plumbing, and automotive problems. Maybe it 
was the meteor shower wreaking havoc with us mortals, along with the full moon. 

~ Molly Wms.
Molly Williams
Volunteer, Waterboro Public Library
Weblog: http://www.waterboro.lib.me.us/blog.htm

Quoting Raymond Wood <raywood at magma.ca>:

> On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 09:56:30AM -0800, Kathy Gaynor remarked:
> > I've been trying to keep an eye on issues regarding XML, CSS,
> > Javascript, etc.  I was wondering if there was any consensus
> > on steps websites should be taking or directions in which they
> > should be moving.  Probably 99% of our web pages
> > (<http://library.webster.edu>) are straight HTML.  Should I be
> > gradually switching these to Cascading Style Sheets?  Should I
> > be adding closing tags (e.g. </p>) and cleaning up other code
> > to conform to XML?  Should we change our document type
> > definitions?
> 
> These are questions I have asked myself as well.  These are my
> opinions, and I'd be interested in the opinions of others  :)
> 
> o Aim for HTML 4.01 Transitional or XHTML.
> o CSS are a good thing.
> o Closing tags (and lower case tags) are recommended to prepare
>   for eventual migration to XHTML or XML.
> o I've been going with doctype HTML 4.01 Transitional, most
>   because I like to hedge my bets  ;>
> 
> > It's so easy just to sit back and ignore all these
> > developments since most have indicated that plain HTML pages
> > will continue to work for some time.  I'm concerned, however,
> > that there are steps a responsible website developer (albeit
> > an amateur) should be taking in preparation for things to
> > come.  Much like the steps taken to insure Y2K compliance, I
> > don't want to wake up on the future's equivalent of Jan. 1,
> > 2000 and find I missed the boat.
> > 
> > Thanks for your advice.  I'm feeling technologically
> > vulnerable these days as my car's battery died on Sunday,  I
> > have a runaway bathroom faucet gushing like a geyser that I
> > can't fix myself, and I apparently blew some circuit in the
> > master bath and now half the lights in the bedroom won't work.
> > Forget the XML--does anyone know a good electrician in St.
> > Louis?
> 
> Full moon blues?
> 
> Cheers,
> Raymond