-
Slim - A Fast, Lightweight Template Engine for Ruby
Very cool-looking lightweight way to write HTML. Along the lines of Haml, but perhaps even simpler and cleaner. I dig it.
Visit -
James Bennett: In pace requiescat
Another thoughtful piece of the demise of XHTML2.
Visit -
Jeremy Keith: Misunderstanding markup
Easily the best overview I’ve seen of XHTML, XHTML2, HTML5, and the related concerns for your typical standards-oriented front-end web developer. Bottom line: the death of XHTML2 and the move to HTML5 does not mean you lose all the things you love about XHTML 1 and 1.1. Relax, folks. It’ll be okay. :)
Visit -
Zeldman: XHTML WTF
After reading the comments on Jeffrey’s post, I’m surprised and a bit dismayed that people are shocked to hear XHTML2 is dead. It’s been dead for quite some time — just not officially so. As I’ve been saying for the past couple years, HTML5 is the way. XHTML was a nice way to get us all thinking about writing better code, and it helped the Web Standards movement by giving us something to latch onto, but it’s time to let it go, guys. Relax. It’ll be okay.
Visit -
Your markup validator
Your markup validator, whether it’s the one on the W3C site or one built into your favorite coding tool, is a debugging tool. It should be used as such. Its job is to find errors in your code, so that you can fix them (or at least be aware of them).
Your markup validator, whether it’s the one on the W3C site or one built into your favorite coding tool, is not a measuring stick for greatness. It’s not to be used on other people’s code for the purpose of pointing out their shortcomings as a markup coder so that you can make yourself feel better than them. The fact that your code passes a validator does not make it better than the next guy’s code. There is almost never a good reason for you to be validating someone else’s code. Usually, if you’re validating someone else’s code, it’s because you’re being an asshole.
More
