Welcome!

Microservices Expo Authors: Pat Romanski, Liz McMillan, Mamoon Yunus, Elizabeth White, Mehdi Daoudi

Related Topics: Industrial IoT

Industrial IoT: Article

XHTML: XML On The Client Side

XHTML: XML On The Client Side

The XML developer doesn't have to be convinced of XML's strength. You've heard it a million times: it's all about the data. The same is true on the client side. XHTML strongly embraces the separation of content and presentation, and brings XML's syntactical logic, as well as extensible opportunities, to the client-side table.

XHTML 1.0, a reformulation of HTML as an XML application, has been the W3C's Web markup recommendation (www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/) since January 26, 2000. That's more than a year now, but client-side authors and developers of popular authoring software have been slow on the take. Much of the problem lies in the fact that XHTML is misunderstood and not well publicized. Some client-side authors don't see it as having any special advantages, and many critics have claimed that XHTML simply won't be widely adopted. This may well be proven out. XHTML has been almost completely missed by the vast majority of entry- and mid-level professionals.

Ignoring or overlooking XHTML is problematic for the professional developer. Whether it's a useful client-side methodology remains a personal question. However, knowing what it is, why it is, and how it may or may not effectively aid the work you do allows you to make an informed, empowered decision about the technologies you choose to employ.

XHTML: What and Why
In simple terms, writing documents in XHTML means that instead of authoring that old familiar HTML, you are in essence writing XML. XML, in XHTML 1.0, employs HTML as its vocabulary. So elements and attributes are not arbitrary - they're drawn directly from HTML. Similarly, XML syntax rules are applied.

But how does this help client-side authors? The answer is simple. How many of you have honestly paid much attention to the HTML you generate? Some of you will certainly say you do, but most developers - like most Web designers - are guilty of a slapdash attitude toward HTML. It's not your fault. HTML has become sloppy, in part because it's been bent in many directions to accommodate the rapid growth of the Web. And browsers are extremely forgiving of poor markup. Nothing has demanded that you write clean documents because for the most part you haven't had to.

The problems resulting from this are manifold. First, there's no consistency in markup from one HTML author to the next. They've each got their own methodology - some write elements in uppercase, others in lowercase. Quotes are sometimes in use, sometimes not. Looking under the hood at even the most high-end site is usually not a pretty experience. So adding a little syntactical rigor to the mix via XHTML gets authors on the same page, if you'll pardon the pun. That can make for a much smoother workflow among teams.

XHTML 1.0 focuses heavily on getting markup cleaned up. But XHTML has another goal, too, and that's to extend to user agents beyond the Web browser: PDAs, smart phones, set-top boxes, and other alternative and wireless devices. Streamline and strengthen the markup, and you've got a stronger base from which to extend it. That's a logical and rational idea.

Another argument made in XHTML's defense - and it's a controversial one but I buy into it - is that it helps the client-side author who has XML phobia to begin moving into the XML arena via familiar means. I like this argument because as an educator, I've seen proof that it works. Take entry- or mid-level Web authors, teach them XHTML, and suddenly you can also teach them other XML applications: WML, SMIL, SVG. The light bulb goes on because they're operating in an environment that's familiar - HTML. The XML kind of sneaks in via document structure and syntactical rules.

Brass Tacks: XHTML Document Structure
To gain a better idea of how XHTML 1.0 works, let's first examine its document structure.
Ideally, an XML document begins with an XML declaration:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
But XHTML documents are most often viewed using popular Web browsers, which in some cases will render anything with an XML declaration as text. So for XHTML 1.0, the W3C recommends (but does not require) that the XML declaration be intact. Most Web authors leave it off.

Next comes the DTD, which is required. With XHTML 1.0, you can choose from three public DTDs: strict, transitional, or frameset. Developers working with HTML 4.0 will be familiar with these DTDs and know that the strict DTD uses the most limited set of elements and attributes of the three, basing much of its selection on the idea that presentation and structure must be separate. So you won't find the font element in a strict document. Transitional documents, however, are more flexible, understanding that Web authors must make some accommodations in order to achieve the best interoperability possible. Frameset documents are limited to framesets and can employ elements from strict or transitional DTDs.

For a strict XHTML 1.0 document, you'll use the following declaration:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/ xhtml1-strict.dtd">

If you want to write your document in accordance with the transitional DTD, you'll use:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/ xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
Finally, if you're authoring a frameset, you'll use this declaration:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Frameset//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/ xhtml1-frameset.dtd">
It's important to remember that there are no exceptions to the rule here. You must declare the proper DTD in your XHTML 1.0 document.

Now it's time to add the namespace to the root. In XHTML 1.0 the root element is html. The root and namespace is also a requirement, and is written as follows:

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
Listing 1 shows a strict document template using the XML declaration. In Listing 2 I show a transitional document template using a meta workaround for document encoding should you choose not to use the XML declaration.

Get Tough: XHTML Syntax
Now that you've got the document structure down, it's time to explore the syntactical rules that XHTML 1.0 embodies:

  • Must be well formed
  • Is case specific
  • Insists on closing tags for nonempty elements, and termination of empty elements with a trailing slash
  • Demands that all attribute values be quoted Let's take a closer look.

Well-Formedness
Remember, Web browsers are built to forgive. That's one reason they're so bloated; they have to be able to interpret such a wide variety of markup styles. And most browsers will forgive ill-formed syntax. Try the following poorly formed bit of HTML in a browser:

<b><i>An ill-formed bit of HTML</b></i>
In common browsers such as MSIE and NN, this markup will appear in both bold and italics. However, if you examine the HTML, you'll see that the tags are improperly nested. If this markup were well formed, the tags would nest properly:
<b><i>A well-formed bit of HTML</i></b>
XHTML 1.0 must be well formed to be valid XHTML. A little trick I use to make sure I've nested my tags properly is to draw an imaginary line from the opening tag to its closing companion. If the lines don't intersect, it's properly nested and therefore well formed. Intersecting lines will indicate improperly nested, ill-formed markup.

Case Specificity
As you're already aware, XML is case sensitive:

<PRODUCT>
</PRODUCT>
and
<product>
</product>
are two different tag sets.

HTML, on the other hand, is not case specific:

<P align="right">
</P> is the same as: <p ALIGN="right">
</p>
XHTML is case specific. In every instance all elements and attribute names must be lower case:
<p align="right">
</p>
Note that attribute values can be in upper- or lowercase as necessary to accommodate file names, code strings, and URIs.

Element Handling
XHTML 1.0 adopts the XML method of closing all nonempty elements and terminating empty elements with a trailing slash. In HTML you can write the following:

<ul>
<li>list item 1
<li>list item 2
<li>list item 3
</ul>

but in XHTML, you must close the nonempty element:

<ul>
<li>list item 1</li>
<li>list item 2</li>
<li>list item 3</li>
</ul>
One of the more obvious places this occurs is with the paragraph <p> tag. You must close all nonempty elements, no exceptions.

If an element is empty (no content), it must terminate. In XML this is done by using a trailing slash as follows:

<br/>
But many Web browsers will choke on this method and subsequently not render a page or render it improperly. a workaround is to add a space before the slash. This allows all empty elements to be properly rendered. A few examples:
<img />
<hr />
<meta />
<link />
As with nonempty elements, there can be no exception to the rules. You must terminate the element accordingly.

Quoth the Attribute Value...
One of the more frustrating things about HTML - at least to my eye - is the arbitrariness of attribute value quoting. In HTML it's a now-you-see-it, now-you-don't phenomenon. So you can have:

<img src="my.jpg" border="1" width=400 height=200 alt="company logo">
or any combination of attribute value quotations you like. In most instances a browser will properly render the markup whether you've quoted the attribute value or not.

XHTML insists that you quote all attribute values, leaving nothing to chance:

<img src="my.jpg" border="1" width="400" height="200" alt="company logo" />

Not so hard, really
as you can now see, XHTML 1.0 is really no great challenge. Does it mean employing a little more care when creating documents? Yes. Does it mean watching your syntax? Absolutely. But with a few minor adjustments you can have clean markup that works in today's browsers with as close-to-perfect interoperability as HTML and still complies with W3C recommendations.

Advancing Notions: Modularization of XHTML
So what's a little cleanliness, anyway? Critics of XHTML have pointed out that changing habits just to write cleaner documents doesn't provide much incentive. It's time consuming and why on earth would you want to go back and rewrite hundreds, possibly thousands, of Web documents just to comply with a W3C recommendation when those documents function perfectly well? I can't, and won't, argue this point. It's too strong an argument. But if you're interested in moving toward extensibility, want to create consistent documents organization-wide, and want to assist your client-side authors in expanding their markup horizons, working with XHTML makes sense.

While XHTML 1.0 offers little option for extensibility - you've got three set DTDs and a specific namespace - the modularization of XHTML does offer expansion. Modularization of XHTML, which allows for the use of XML DTDs and provides the means to create subsets and extensions to XHTML, takes XHTML 1.0 from its limited place closer to its goal of working for numerous user agents. As of this writing, modularization of XHTML is a Candidate Rec-ommendation of the W3C (www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xhtml-modularization-20001020/).

Modularization of XHTML is a decomposition of HTML as we know it today. Instead of lumping markup methods such as managing text, images, tables, and forms, modularization breaks these things into separate modules. Then, using XML DTDs (an implementation of XML schemas is also under discussion), authors can pull together a subset of XHTML using only those modules necessary to accomplish a given task.

If you put modularization in the context of alternative device design, the rationale for XHTML begins to make a lot of sense. Many alternative devices simply don't have the processing, RAM, and video power to handle HTML's original functions. So why have all the overhead? A streamlined markup language using only those modules necessary for the device means faster, customizable delivery to equally streamlined optimized user agents.

A perfect example of modularization exists in XHTML Basic (www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/), a subset of XHTML 1.1, made up of specific modules that apply to wireless devices such as PDAs, smart phones, and smart pagers. These devices are limited in their processing power, so XHTML Basic supplies those modules only for markup that make sense, such as text, links, images, very basic tables, and forms. Frames or scripting demand processing power, so they're left out of the subset. XHTML Basic, at this writing a Proposed Recommendation of the W3C, looks just like XHTML, but of course any element that falls into a module not set forth in the recommendation can't be used in a valid XHTML Basic document. However, you can extend XHTML Basic if you want to. This enables the creation of additional subsets and extensions.

Listing 3 shows a simple XHTML Basic page suitable for display on a small, wireless device such as a PDA. The listing clearly illustrates how XHTML Basic uses the structural elements set forth in XHTML 1.0, only this time the DTD that's declared is for XHTML Basic itself. The namespace is the same, as are the syntactical methodologies.

Bring It On Home
The developer who's empowered with knowledge can make better decisions. Whether you embrace client-side XML in the form of XHTML is up to you. But a careful survey of your needs and directions will help answer the question of whether XHTML will be useful in your unique situation. Being aware of what's happening with XHTML and its goals will keep you at the ready should your circumstances require you to develop not only for the Web of tomorrow, but for the wireless world and beyond.

More Stories By Molly E. Holzschlag

Molly E. Holzschlag is the executive editor of WebReview.com. She is the author of 16 books on Internet and Web design and development topics, including her most recent, Special Edition Using XHTML, from Que. You can visit her Web site at www.molly.com.

Comments (0)

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.


@MicroservicesExpo Stories
In his session at 20th Cloud Expo, Scott Davis, CTO of Embotics, discussed how automation can provide the dynamic management required to cost-effectively deliver microservices and container solutions at scale. He also discussed how flexible automation is the key to effectively bridging and seamlessly coordinating both IT and developer needs for component orchestration across disparate clouds – an increasingly important requirement at today’s multi-cloud enterprise.
IT organizations are moving to the cloud in hopes to approve efficiency, increase agility and save money. Migrating workloads might seem like a simple task, but what many businesses don’t realize is that application migration criteria differs across organizations, making it difficult for architects to arrive at an accurate TCO number. In his session at 21st Cloud Expo, Joe Kinsella, CTO of CloudHealth Technologies, will offer a systematic approach to understanding the TCO of a cloud application...
API Security has finally entered our security zeitgeist. OWASP Top 10 2017 - RC1 recognized API Security as a first class citizen by adding it as number 10, or A-10 on its list of web application vulnerabilities. We believe this is just the start. The attack surface area offered by API is orders or magnitude larger than any other attack surface area. Consider the fact the APIs expose cloud services, internal databases, application and even legacy mainframes over the internet. What could go wrong...
The goal of Continuous Testing is to shift testing left to find defects earlier and release software faster. This can be achieved by integrating a set of open source functional and performance testing tools in the early stages of your software delivery lifecycle. There is one process that binds all application delivery stages together into one well-orchestrated machine: Continuous Testing. Continuous Testing is the conveyer belt between the Software Factory and production stages. Artifacts are m...
In IT, we sometimes coin terms for things before we know exactly what they are and how they’ll be used. The resulting terms may capture a common set of aspirations and goals – as “cloud” did broadly for on-demand, self-service, and flexible computing. But such a term can also lump together diverse and even competing practices, technologies, and priorities to the point where important distinctions are glossed over and lost.
In his session at @DevOpsSummit at 20th Cloud Expo, Kelly Looney, director of DevOps consulting for Skytap, showed how an incremental approach to introducing containers into complex, distributed applications results in modernization with less risk and more reward. He also shared the story of how Skytap used Docker to get out of the business of managing infrastructure, and into the business of delivering innovation and business value. Attendees learned how up-front planning allows for a clean sep...
Most companies are adopting or evaluating container technology - Docker in particular - to speed up application deployment, drive down cost, ease management and make application delivery more flexible overall. As with most new architectures, this dream takes a lot of work to become a reality. Even when you do get your application componentized enough and packaged properly, there are still challenges for DevOps teams to making the shift to continuous delivery and achieving that reduction in cost ...
Enterprise architects are increasingly adopting multi-cloud strategies as they seek to utilize existing data center assets, leverage the advantages of cloud computing and avoid cloud vendor lock-in. This requires a globally aware traffic management strategy that can monitor infrastructure health across data centers and end-user experience globally, while responding to control changes and system specification at the speed of today’s DevOps teams. In his session at 20th Cloud Expo, Josh Gray, Chie...
"At the keynote this morning we spoke about the value proposition of Nutanix, of having a DevOps culture and a mindset, and the business outcomes of achieving agility and scale, which everybody here is trying to accomplish," noted Mark Lavi, DevOps Solution Architect at Nutanix, in this SYS-CON.tv interview at @DevOpsSummit at 20th Cloud Expo, held June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY.
We have already established the importance of APIs in today’s digital world (read about it here). With APIs playing such an important role in keeping us connected, it’s necessary to maintain the API’s performance as well as availability. There are multiple aspects to consider when monitoring APIs, from integration to performance issues, therefore a general monitoring strategy that only accounts for up-time is not ideal.
Web services have taken the development world by storm, especially in recent years as they've become more and more widely adopted. There are naturally many reasons for this, but first, let's understand what exactly a web service is. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) defines "web of services" as "message-based design frequently found on the Web and in enterprise software". Basically, a web service is a method of sending a message between two devices through a network. In practical terms, this ...
In his session at 20th Cloud Expo, Mike Johnston, an infrastructure engineer at Supergiant.io, discussed how to use Kubernetes to set up a SaaS infrastructure for your business. Mike Johnston is an infrastructure engineer at Supergiant.io with over 12 years of experience designing, deploying, and maintaining server and workstation infrastructure at all scales. He has experience with brick and mortar data centers as well as cloud providers like Digital Ocean, Amazon Web Services, and Rackspace. H...
All organizations that did not originate this moment have a pre-existing culture as well as legacy technology and processes that can be more or less amenable to DevOps implementation. That organizational culture is influenced by the personalities and management styles of Executive Management, the wider culture in which the organization is situated, and the personalities of key team members at all levels of the organization. This culture and entrenched interests usually throw a wrench in the work...
As many know, the first generation of Cloud Management Platform (CMP) solutions were designed for managing virtual infrastructure (IaaS) and traditional applications. But that’s no longer enough to satisfy evolving and complex business requirements. In his session at 21st Cloud Expo, Scott Davis, Embotics CTO, will explore how next-generation CMPs ensure organizations can manage cloud-native and microservice-based application architectures, while also facilitating agile DevOps methodology. He wi...
When you focus on a journey from up-close, you look at your own technical and cultural history and how you changed it for the benefit of the customer. This was our starting point: too many integration issues, 13 SWP days and very long cycles. It was evident that in this fast-paced industry we could no longer afford this reality. We needed something that would take us beyond reducing the development lifecycles, CI and Agile methodologies. We made a fundamental difference, even changed our culture...
We have Continuous Integration and we have Continuous Deployment, but what’s continuous across all of what we do is people. Even when tasks are automated, someone wrote the automation. So, Jayne Groll evangelizes about Continuous Everyone. Jayne is the CEO of the DevOps Institute and the author of Agile Service Management Guide. She talked about Continuous Everyone at the 2016 All Day DevOps conference. She describes it as "about people, culture, and collaboration mapped into your value streams....
These days, change is the only constant. In order to adapt and thrive in an ever-advancing and sometimes chaotic workforce, companies must leverage intelligent tools to streamline operations. While we're only at the dawn of machine intelligence, using a workflow manager will benefit your company in both the short and long term. Think: reduced errors, improved efficiency and more empowered employees-and that's just the start. Here are five other reasons workflow automation is leading a revolution...
Docker is sweeping across startups and enterprises alike, changing the way we build and ship applications. It's the most prominent and widely known software container platform, and it's particularly useful for eliminating common challenges when collaborating on code (like the "it works on my machine" phenomenon that most devs know all too well). With Docker, you can run and manage apps side-by-side - in isolated containers - resulting in better compute density. It's something that many developer...
While some vendors scramble to create and sell you a fancy solution for monitoring your spanking new Amazon Lambdas, hear how you can do it on the cheap using just built-in Java APIs yourself. By exploiting a little-known fact that Lambdas aren’t exactly single-threaded, you can effectively identify hot spots in your serverless code. In his session at @DevOpsSummit at 21st Cloud Expo, Dave Martin, Product owner at CA Technologies, will give a live demonstration and code walkthrough, showing how ...
Did you know that you can develop for mainframes in Java? Or that the testing and deployment can be automated across mobile to mainframe? In his session and demo at @DevOpsSummit at 21st Cloud Expo, Dana Boudreau, a Senior Director at CA Technologies, will discuss how increasingly teams are developing with agile methodologies, using modern development environments, and automating testing and deployments, mobile to mainframe.