Found a rather nice thing related to the usage of XHTML. If you are in doubt wether when to use HTML or XHTML, read this:

  • Do you see a need for your work to be extended to other delivery mechanisms such as wireless devices now or in the future?
  • Do you want an educational tool that will transition you and your colleagues from HTML to the XML world with relative ease?
  • Do you want to bring syntactical strength to your Web documents, even if it means compromising certain visual considerations?
  • Are you concerned with following W3C recommendations in order to promote more stable support from the developers of browsers and Web design tools?

If you answered “yes” to any one, or any combination of these questions, then XHTML 1.0 is something you might seriously wish to consider. (Taken from Digital-web.com. ) And to bring you more up-to-date with the XHTML vs HTML fight, the guys at Autistic Cukkoo are quite fed up with it:

There is no doubt that XHTML is hot right now. The myth says that XHTML is much better or stricter than HTML and that web standards require XHTML. The truth is that very few actually benefit at all from using XHTML, mostly because the most popular browser in the world doesn’t support XHTML at all. In order to circumvent this not altogether negligible limitation, most people choose to serve their XHTML documents with a text/html media type. The majority of those who do so probably have no idea that it causes user agents to interpret the documents as if they were HTML.

Put in mind, this was in 2004! Are there so many sites with bad html?