Fred wrote:
> Just about the time I have started to feel comfortable programming in
HTML,
> this XML comes along.
Where have you been? If I wasn't feeling charitable I'd post a
grump-o-gram and just tell you to Google it.
> Would some kind soul pls post the difference between
> the two
Apples and Oranges.
> and why one is better than the other.
A Fish.
XML was '97s replacement for SGML, because SGML was too difficult to
understand and there were no accessible tools to use it (for
"practical" values of people, projects and budget). By '99 there were
usable free XML tools deployed onto many, and deployable onto most,
desktops. Nowadays you can find competent XML developers almost
anywhere, but SGML knowledge is still commercially negligible. XML
_has_ won (sorry Arjun)
XML is not a HTML substitute. XHTML (HTML in XML) is not yet a HTML
substitute, and may not ever be so (if you believe some people).
So ignore XML for your web authoring. Stick with HTML 4.01 Strict.
If anyone pokes you and says "use XML for this other job", then that is
time to start taking notice. Then try Wikipedia etc. for basic starter
guides.
|
