forked from orbit-oss/flask
Applied leafstorm's html5faq patch
This commit is contained in:
parent
235d693bfc
commit
5a5a4a85bf
2 changed files with 115 additions and 71 deletions
1
AUTHORS
1
AUTHORS
|
|
@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ Patches and Suggestions
|
||||||
- Justin Quick
|
- Justin Quick
|
||||||
- Kenneth Reitz
|
- Kenneth Reitz
|
||||||
- Marian Sigler
|
- Marian Sigler
|
||||||
|
- Matthew Frazier
|
||||||
- Ron DuPlain
|
- Ron DuPlain
|
||||||
- Sebastien Estienne
|
- Sebastien Estienne
|
||||||
- Simon Sapin
|
- Simon Sapin
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
185
docs/htmlfaq.rst
185
docs/htmlfaq.rst
|
|
@ -2,66 +2,75 @@ HTML/XHTML FAQ
|
||||||
==============
|
==============
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Flask documentation and example applications are using HTML5. You
|
The Flask documentation and example applications are using HTML5. You
|
||||||
will notice that in many situations when end tags are optional they are
|
may notice that in many situations, when end tags are optional they are
|
||||||
not used to keep the HTML cleaner and also faster to load. Because there
|
not used, so that the HTML is cleaner and faster to load. Because there
|
||||||
is a lot of confusion about HTML and XHTML out there this document tries
|
is much confusion about HTML and XHTML among developers, this document tries
|
||||||
to answer some of them.
|
to answer some of the major questions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
History on XHTML
|
History of XHTML
|
||||||
----------------
|
----------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
For a while it looked like HTML was about to be replaced by XHTML.
|
For a while, it appeared that HTML was about to be replaced by XHTML.
|
||||||
However barely any websites on the internet are actually real XHTML (which
|
However, barely any websites on the Internet are actual XHTML (which is
|
||||||
means XHTML processed with XML rules). There are a couple of reasons why
|
HTML processed using XML rules). There are a couple of major reasons
|
||||||
this is the case. It mostly has to do with Internet Explorer which does
|
why this is the case. One of them is Internet Explorer's lack of proper
|
||||||
not accept the XHTML mimetype to switch the browser into XML mode.
|
XHTML support. The XHTML spec states that XHTML must be served with the MIME
|
||||||
However this is really easy to bypass but barely anyone does that. This
|
type `application/xhtml+xml`, but Internet Explorer refuses to read files
|
||||||
probably has to do with the fact that XHTML is really painful.
|
with that MIME type.
|
||||||
|
While it is relatively easy to configure Web servers to serve XHTML properly,
|
||||||
|
few people do. This is likely because properly using XHTML can be quite
|
||||||
|
painful.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Why is it painful? XML has very strict errorhandling. On a parsing error
|
One of the most important causes of pain is XML's draconian (strict and
|
||||||
the browser is supposed to show the user an ugly error message. Most of
|
ruthless) error handling. When an XML parsing error is encountered,
|
||||||
|
the browser is supposed to show the user an ugly error message, instead
|
||||||
|
of attempting to recover from the error and display what it can. Most of
|
||||||
the (X)HTML generation on the web is based on non-XML template engines
|
the (X)HTML generation on the web is based on non-XML template engines
|
||||||
(such as Jinja, the one used in Flask) which do not protect you from
|
(such as Jinja, the one used in Flask) which do not protect you from
|
||||||
accidentally creating invalid HTML. There are XML based template engines
|
accidentally creating invalid XHTML. There are XML based template engines,
|
||||||
but they usually come with a larger runtime overhead and are not as
|
such as Kid and the popular Genshi, but they often come with a larger
|
||||||
straightforward to use because they have to obey XML rules.
|
runtime overhead and, are not as straightforward to use because they have
|
||||||
|
to obey XML rules.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Now the majority of users assumed they were using XHTML though. The
|
The majority of users, however, assumed they were properly using XHTML.
|
||||||
reasons for that is that they sticked an XHTML doctype on top of the
|
They wrote an XHTML doctype at the top of the document and self-closed all
|
||||||
document and self-closed all necessary tags (``<br>`` becomes ``<br/>`` or
|
the necessary tags (``<br>`` becomes ``<br/>`` or ``<br></br>`` in XHTML).
|
||||||
``<br></br>`` in XHTML). However even if the document properly validates
|
However, even if the document properly validates as XHTML, what really
|
||||||
as XHTML there are still other things to keep in mind.
|
determines XHTML/HTML processing in browsers is the MIME type, which as
|
||||||
|
said before is often not set properly. So the valid XHTML was being treated
|
||||||
|
as invalid HTML.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
XHTML also changes the way you work with JavaScript because you now have
|
XHTML also changed the way JavaScript is used. To properly work with XHTML,
|
||||||
to use the namespaced DOM interface with the XHTML namespace to query for
|
programmers have to use the namespaced DOM interface with the XHTML
|
||||||
HTML elements.
|
namespace to query for HTML elements.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
History of HTML5
|
History of HTML5
|
||||||
----------------
|
----------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
HTML5 was started in 2004 under the name Web Applications 1.0 by the
|
Development of the HTML5 specification was started in 2004 under the name
|
||||||
WHATWG (Apple, Mozilla, Opera) and the idea was to write a new and
|
"Web Applications 1.0" by the Web Hypertext Application Technology Working
|
||||||
improved specification of HTML based on actual browser behaviour instead
|
Group, or WHATWG (which was formed by the major browser vendors Apple,
|
||||||
of behaviour that exists on the paper but could not be implemented
|
Mozilla, and Opera) with the goal of writing a new and improved HTML
|
||||||
because of backwards compatibility with the already existing web.
|
specification, based on existing browser behaviour instead of unrealistic
|
||||||
|
and backwards-incompatible specifications.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
For example in theory HTML4 ``<title/Hello/`` means exactly the same as
|
For example, in HTML4 ``<title/Hello/`` theoretically parses exactly the
|
||||||
``<title>Hello</title>`` but because existing websites are using
|
same as ``<title>Hello</title>``. However, since people were using
|
||||||
pseudo-XHTML which uses the Slash in different ways, this could not be
|
XHTML-like tags along the lines of ``<link />``, browser vendors implemented
|
||||||
implemented properly.
|
the XHTML syntax over the syntax defined by the specification.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In 2007 the specification was adopted as the basis of a new HTML
|
In 2007, the specification was adopted as the basis of a new HTML
|
||||||
specification under the umbrella of the W3C. Currently it looks like
|
specification under the umbrella of the W3C, known as HTML5. Currently,
|
||||||
XHTML is losing traction, the XHTML 2 working group was disbanded and
|
it appears that XHTML is losing traction, as the XHTML 2 working group has
|
||||||
HTML5 is being implemented by all major browser vendors.
|
een disbanded and HTML5 is being implemented by all major browser vendors.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
HTML versus XHTML
|
HTML versus XHTML
|
||||||
-----------------
|
-----------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The following table gives you a quick overview of features available in
|
The following table gives you a quick overview of features available in
|
||||||
HTML 4.01, XHTML 1.1 and HTML5 (we are not looking at XHTML 1.0 here which
|
HTML 4.01, XHTML 1.1 and HTML5. (XHTML 1.0 is not included, as it was
|
||||||
was superceeded by XHTML 1.1 or XHTML5 which is barely supported currently):
|
superseded by XHTML 1.1 and the barely-used XHTML5.)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. tabularcolumns:: |p{9cm}|p{2cm}|p{2cm}|p{2cm}|
|
.. tabularcolumns:: |p{9cm}|p{2cm}|p{2cm}|p{2cm}|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -74,10 +83,10 @@ was superceeded by XHTML 1.1 or XHTML5 which is barely supported currently):
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
| ``<script/>`` supported | |N| | |Y| | |N| |
|
| ``<script/>`` supported | |N| | |Y| | |N| |
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
| might be served as `text/html` | |Y| | |N| [3]_ | |Y| |
|
| should be served as `text/html` | |Y| | |N| [3]_ | |Y| |
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
| might be served as | |N| | |Y| | |N| |
|
| should be served as | |N| | |Y| | |N| |
|
||||||
| `application/xml+html` | | | |
|
| `application/xhtml+xml` | | | |
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
| strict error handling | |N| | |Y| | |N| |
|
| strict error handling | |N| | |Y| | |N| |
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
|
|
@ -89,12 +98,13 @@ was superceeded by XHTML 1.1 or XHTML5 which is barely supported currently):
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
| ``<audio>`` tag | |N| | |N| | |Y| |
|
| ``<audio>`` tag | |N| | |N| | |Y| |
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
| New semantical tags like ``<article>`` | |N| | |N| | |Y| |
|
| New semantic tags like ``<article>`` | |N| | |N| | |Y| |
|
||||||
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
+-----------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. [1] Obscure feature inherited from SGML not supported by browsers
|
.. [1] This is an obscure feature inherited from SGML. It is usually not
|
||||||
.. [2] For compatibility with XHTML generating server code for some
|
supported by browsers, for reasons detailed above.
|
||||||
tags such as ``<br>``. Should not be used.
|
.. [2] This is for compatibility with server code that generates XHTML for
|
||||||
|
tags such as ``<br>``. It should not be used in new code.
|
||||||
.. [3] XHTML 1.0 is the last XHTML standard that allows to be served
|
.. [3] XHTML 1.0 is the last XHTML standard that allows to be served
|
||||||
as `text/html` for backwards compatibility reasons.
|
as `text/html` for backwards compatibility reasons.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -103,27 +113,30 @@ was superceeded by XHTML 1.1 or XHTML5 which is barely supported currently):
|
||||||
.. |N| image:: _static/no.png
|
.. |N| image:: _static/no.png
|
||||||
:alt: No
|
:alt: No
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
What does Strict Mean?
|
What does "strict" mean?
|
||||||
----------------------
|
------------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
HTML5 has strictly defined parsing rules, but it also specifies how a
|
HTML5 has strictly defined parsing rules, but it also specifies exactly
|
||||||
browser should react to parsing errors. Some things people stumble upon
|
how a browser should react to parsing errors - unlike XHTML, which simply
|
||||||
with HTML5 and older HTML standards is that browsers will accept some
|
states parsing should abort. Some people are confused by apparently
|
||||||
things that still create the expected output even though it looks wrong
|
invalid syntax that still generates the expected results (for example,
|
||||||
(eg: certain tags are missing or are not closed).
|
missing end tags or unquoted attribute values).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some of that is caused by the error handling browsers use if they
|
Some of these work because of the lenient error handling most browsers use
|
||||||
encounter a markup error, others are actually specified. The following
|
when they encounter a markup error, others are actually specified. The
|
||||||
things are optional in HTML5 by standard and have to be supported by
|
following constructs are optional in HTML5 by standard, but have to be
|
||||||
browsers (and are supported):
|
supported by browsers:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- ``<html>``, ``<head>`` or ``<body>``
|
- Wrapping the document in an ``<html>`` tag
|
||||||
- The closing tags for ``<p>``, ``<li>``, ``<dl>``, ``<dd>``, ``<tr>``,
|
- Wrapping header elements in ``<head>`` or the body elements in
|
||||||
``<td>``, ``<th>``, ``<tbody>``, ``<thead>``, ``<tfoot>``.
|
``<body>``
|
||||||
- quotes for attribtues if they contain no whitespace and some
|
- Closing the ``<p>``, ``<li>``, ``<dl>``, ``<dd>``, ``<tr>``,
|
||||||
special chars that require quoting.
|
``<td>``, ``<th>``, ``<tbody>``, ``<thead>``, or ``<tfoot>`` tags.
|
||||||
|
- Quoting attributes, so long as they contain no whitespace or
|
||||||
|
special characters (like ``<``, ``>``, ``'``, or ``"``).
|
||||||
|
- Requiring boolean attributes to have a value.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This means the following piece of HTML5 is perfectly valid:
|
This means the following page in HTML5 is perfectly valid:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. sourcecode:: html
|
.. sourcecode:: html
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -152,13 +165,43 @@ This means the following piece of HTML5 is perfectly valid:
|
||||||
</div>
|
</div>
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
New technologies in HTML5
|
||||||
|
-------------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
HTML5 adds many new features that make Web applications easier to write
|
||||||
|
and to use.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- The ``<audio>`` and ``<video>`` tags provide a way to embed audio and
|
||||||
|
video without complicated add-ons like QuickTime and Flask.
|
||||||
|
- Semantic elements like ``<article>``, ``<header>``, ``<nav>``, and
|
||||||
|
``<time>`` that make content easier to understand.
|
||||||
|
- The ``<canvas>`` tag, which supports a powerful drawing API, reducing
|
||||||
|
the need for server-generated images to present data graphically.
|
||||||
|
- New form control types like ``<input type="date">`` that allow user
|
||||||
|
agents to make entering and validating values easier.
|
||||||
|
- Advanced JavaScript APIs like Web Storage, Web Workers, Web Sockets,
|
||||||
|
geolocation, and offline applications.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Many other features have been added, as well. A good guide to new features
|
||||||
|
in HTML5 is Mark Pilgrim's soon-to-be-published book, `Dive Into HTML5`_.
|
||||||
|
Not all of them are supported in browsers yet, however, so use caution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
_Dive into HTML5: http://www.diveintohtml5.org/
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
What should be used?
|
What should be used?
|
||||||
--------------------
|
--------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Currently the answer is HTML5. There are very few reasons to use XHTML
|
Currently, the answer is HTML5. There are very few reasons to use XHTML
|
||||||
with the latest development. There are some companies successfully using
|
considering the latest developments in Web browsers. To summarize the
|
||||||
actual XML and XSLT on the client side with fallbacks to server side HTML4
|
reasons given above:
|
||||||
generation for browsers not supporting XML and XSLT but but it's not very
|
|
||||||
common. Now that MathML and SVG landed in HTML5 and with the sad support
|
- Internet Explorer (which, sadly, currently leads in market share)
|
||||||
for XHTML in Internet Explorer and many JavaScript libraries for most
|
has poor support for XHTML.
|
||||||
applications no reasons remain to use XHTML.
|
- Many JavaScript libraries also do not support XHTML, due to the more
|
||||||
|
complicated namespacing API it requires.
|
||||||
|
- HTML5 adds several new features, including semantic tags and the
|
||||||
|
long-awaited ``<audio>`` and ``<video>`` tags.
|
||||||
|
- It has the support of most browser vendors behind it.
|
||||||
|
- It is much easier to write, and more compact.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For most applications, it is undoubtably better to use HTML5 than XHTML.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue