ASP.NET and XHTML

[PJ]

How is it that Microsoft sits on the w3c, participates in XHTML
standardization and then completely misses the ball with asp.net?

Does Microsoft have any plans/announcements/concern whatsover with making
asp.net generate valid XHTML? It seems like these changes would be fairly
trivial for them, much easier than it would be for me to write a filter
and/or override the necessary classes.

~PJ

 

[John Saunders]

How is it that Microsoft sits on the w3c, participates in XHTML
standardization and then completely misses the ball with asp.net?

Does Microsoft have any plans/announcements/concern whatsover with making
asp.net generate valid XHTML? It seems like these changes would be fairly
trivial for them, much easier than it would be for me to write a filter
and/or override the necessary classes.

When did the XHTML become final?

 

[Alvin Bruney]

And you are worried that microsoft has dropped the ball on XHTML because...?

 

[PJ]

Visit http://validator.w3.org/file-upload.html and try to validate the
markup from any one of your asp.net pages to xhtml 1.0 ( strict or
transitional ). Matter in fact, I bet you'd have a very tough time even
getting one to validate properly to HTML 4.01 Strict.

Do I need to enumerate shortcomings for you? Apparently so. Please educate
yourself before asking such questions.

- Hidden inputs are not valid as a direct child of a form tag. They must be
contained w/in another containing element (div, span, etc).
- <script> tags must contain a type attribute ( type="text/javascript").
The <script> tags that asp.net generates do not contain this attribute.
- id attributes on elements cannot begin with underscores ( as in
__EVENTTARGET, __EVENTARGUMENT, __VIEWSTATE ).
- name is not a valid attribute ( as in the name attribute written to the
main form. this also invalidates the non DOM javascript that asp.net
generates.
- script must be contained w/ in a CDATA section
- <img runat="server" tags will automatically add a "border" attribute which
is not valid.
- ...

It's much more difficult for me as a developer to difficult for me as a
developer to write a filter to make all the necessary changes to the output,
input then it is for MS to simply modify the asp.net engine to render valid
markup for the developers chosen schema.

 

[PJ]

I don't understand how people can make a job of writing web applications and
not visit the w3c site regurlarly.
http://www.w3c.org/MarkUp/
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/

XHTML 1.0 (strict, transitional), 1.1(strict) has been complete for years.
The next standard in the works is XHTML 2.0.

bookmark www.webstandards.org

 

[Alvin Bruney]

well with that kind of nasty attitude while looking for help, you won't get
any from me

 

[PJ]

I apologize...I'm just a bit frustrated at the lack of concern over this.
Greater concern toward standards within the development community would only
make our lives easier in the long run.

 

[Jerry III]

Not really. As much as I'd like to see Microsoft to adhere to standards and
then extend them (but not extend without supporting first) I don't think it
would make our lives any easier. Standards change, sometimes considerably,
breaking "code" between different versions, and in the case of HTML/XHTML
there is not a single browser that supports W3C's standards (even Mozilla is
not supporting such basics as aligning columns in tables, try to create a
price list with that piece of HTML not supported). Nobody cares about fully
supporting standards, even if Microsoft did you would still have to cater to
users of products that don't. I would not change a thing.

Jerry

 

[John Saunders]

I apologize...I'm just a bit frustrated at the lack of concern over this.
Greater concern toward standards within the development community would only
make our lives easier in the long run.

Most of us are more interested in getting the job done than in whining over
standards compliance.

Also, some of us have a clue at the lead time involved in developing a
product like ASP.NET. My question "when was the XHTML standard finished" was
really, "was the XHTML standard finished and stable to a useful degree early
enough for Microsoft to provide adherence to this standard in the ASP.NET
1.0 timeframe?" I'm willing to bet that the answer is "no".

Bitch about it if XHTML support isn't in ASP.NET 2.0.

 

[Jerry III]

A simple look at W3C's web site shows that XHTML 1.0 was standardized on Jan
26, 2000. Working versions were available long before that. HTML 4 (which is
also not supported by Asp.Net) was standardized on December 18, 1997 - way
ahead of the .Net framework was designed.

Don't use this as an argument, it won't stand.

Jerry

 

[Guest]

Thought this bunch might be interested in the following
announcement.

We are pleased to announce we are accepting applications
to participate in
our limited public beta of XhtmlWebControls. The controls
are a complete
replacement for the System.Web.UI.WebControls namespace.
These controls
produce 100% XHTML Strict 1.0 compliant code and only
contain properties
that are 100% compliant with XHTML Strict 1.0 DTD. Below
is a list of the
controls that this product contains.

XAdRotator
XButton
XCalendar
XCheckBox
XCheckBoxList
XComment
XCompareValidator
XCustomValidator
XDataGrid
XDataList
XDiv
XDropDownList
XForm
XGeneral
XHtmlList
XHyperlink
XImage
XImageButton
XInputFile
XLabel
XListBox
XLinkButton
XPage
XPanel
XParagraph
XRadioButton
XRadioButtonList
XRangeValidator
XRegularExpressionValidator
XRepeater
XRequiredFieldValidator
XSelfClose
XSpan
XTable
XTextArea
XTextBox
XValidationSummary

There are over 150 classes included and involved in
supporting these
objects. You can apply to participate in the limited
public beta at
http://www.xhtmlwebcontrols.net


We have also set up a public discussion forum at
http://forums.xhtmlwebcontrols.net