The following hints will reduce this effect for documents which are served without It is a reformulation of the three HTML4 document types as applications of XML 1.0 [XML]. WebAttributes are defined on the HTML markup but properties are defined on the DOM. If you tried to validate a page containing instances of attribute minimization, for a document to be valid XHTML, attribute cannot minimized (York, 2005). By default, the required in HTML An alternative is to use external script and style documents. Yes. If a user agent encounters an attribute it does not recognize, it must ignore the entire attribute specification (i.e., the attribute and its value). XHTML is a stricter, more XML-based version of HTML. prohibitions in XML. Wrong! XHTML documents can utilize applications (e.g. For me, XHTML makes so much more sense; not because its XML compatible (though thats a huge bonus); but because it means theres a handful of rules which you can consistently obey to have valid code. this specification. The annotated contents of this file are available in this separate section for completeness. is not as clear as and as a developer you need to remember that you may not be the only person working on a project. How to attribute Minimization ? disabled, readonly, multiple, selected, noresize, defer. Yet its the essence of what we would have wanted to keep if XML and XHTML hadnt come around. Such a document must meet all of the following criteria: It must conform to the constraints expressed in one of the three DTDs found in DTDs and in Appendix B. The XHTML namespace may be used with other XML namespaces as per [XMLNS], although such documents are not strictly conforming XHTML 1.0 Instead of using name = "name", XHTML prefers to use id = "id". Documents may not be well-formed suggests that it was fine if HTML code was invalid. profiling mechanism, servers, proxies, and user agents will be able to perform best effort content transformation. Closing empty tags. This applies to HTML as well als CSS and JS. For example, dropping attribute quotes to save a few bytes will cause more issues than simply continuing to follow the XHTML spec, especially given attributes are often dynamically injected these days. The XML document object model specifies that element and attribute names are returned in the case they are specified. For example, in HTML, the Formfeed character (U+000C) is treated as white space, in XHTML, due to XML's definition of It specifies the language of the content within an element. General rules mean less strain on your memory. Include a space before the trailing / and > of empty elements, e.g. that when the XML declaration is not included in a document, the document can only use the default character encodings UTF-8 or UTF-16. Personally, the less you write the better! Users looking for local copies of the DTDs to work with should download and use those archives In order to be Enforce will not be the answer but I think encourage things like always close tags and do not suppress default arguments helps (again, a lot) on the readability of the code. The annotated contents of this file are available in this separate section for completeness. the XML declaration is included. Unfortunately, this constraint cannot be expressed in the XHTML 1.0 DTDs. Being a fan of pipelines and machine-readability, I vastly prefer the consistency and compatibility of XHTML. If the value of the element is less than this, the element fails validation. will not tolerate this incorrect usage, and any document that uses an ampersand incorrectly will not be "valid", and consequently will not conform to this specification. Again, I dont think enforce codestyle is the answers but encourage a more readable code is always a good thing, Most of them I follow yes. XHTML is a stricter, more XML-based version of HTML. I dont always have access to tools that validate the HTML. Use external scripts if your script uses < or maximum forward and backward compatibility (e.g., ). It means you need to explicitly state the attribute and its value. Minifying HTML is so far down on the list of performance optimisations that it might as well not exist, outside of ultra-hyper-optimised stuff like the Google search page. Its totally valid to do these things for your enjoyment of minimalism or optimisation. Perhaps some of them make your code more readable too. It was fine for XHTML to point to wellformedness because of XMLs strict error handling. One is the mental overhead of remembering things you really dont need to remember. Here is an example of an XHTML document. Unfortunately, many HTML user The min attribute defines the minimum value that is acceptable and valid for the input containing the attribute. If the value of the element is less than this, the element fails validation. This value must be less than or equal to the value of the max attribute. Some input types have a default minimum. in SGML. I would argue that articles such as this, while innocently describing the true specification for HTML5, is actually normalising bad practice. Im more than happy spending those extra bytes for readability (and therefore maintainability) of a projects code. a constraint required in your pages : the doctype, as you dont write it, your page goes quirk mode, its a great tool for all codes in your browser. These are handled inconsistently by user agents. defined to be of type ID. Finally, note that XHTML 1.0 has deprecated the name attribute of the a, applet, form, frame, iframe, Here is an example of using DOCTYPE . In an HTML video element, I want to use the minimized controls attribute: