HTML is probably the most successful document markup language in the world. Because of the way XML is defined, it is not possible to do tricks like this, where markup is generated by scripting while the parser is still parsing the markup.
All browsers know how to deal with correct HTML. Using insertAdjacentHTML is not a direct substitute as the browser closes tags which the script requires remain open, and takes twice as long to ultimately create a mangled page.
Much works, but not all: This makes it incredibly difficult to write new web user agents since documents claiming to be HTML are often so poor. W3C offers a service at http: Modularization also makes it clear where it is OK to add new elements, and where it is not.
This is the reason that all elements are set to xml: Why are browsers so fussy about XML? Because earlier versions of HTML were special-purpose languages, it was necessary to ensure a level of backwards compatibility with new versions so that new documents would still be usable in older browsers.
The other two versions, transitional and frameset, were not updated, because there was nothing to update. We could also take advantage of the redesign to clean up some of the more untidy parts of HTML, and add some new needed functionality, like better forms.
On a 7 year old PC running Firefox on Vista, this little exercise takes less than 2 seconds using document. What XHTML2 does is say that all images are equivalent to some piece of content; it does this by allowing you to put a src attribute on any element at all.
This error-correction makes browsers very hard to write, especially if all browsers are expected to do the same thing. You can still achieve the same effects, but you have to do it by using the DOM to add and delete elements. This fact has hampered the adoption of PNG images, which in many ways are better than GIF and JPG, since people have continued to use the lowest-common denominator format, to ensure that everyone can see the images.
I just tested using an onload param in the body tag and even at this point the document is still open and document. Since there are hundreds of different browsers, and more coming all the time not only on PCs, but also on PDAs, mobile phones, televisions, printers, even refrigeratorsit is impossible to test your document on every browser.
HTML browsers accept any input, correct or incorrect, and try to make something sensible of it. Where can I go to verify my document uses correct markup? By the time it is finished this script creates over DOM nodes, mostly table cells.
Note: When this method is not used for testing, it is often used to write some text to. Does mint-body.com work in XHTML? Why is it disallowed to send XHTML documents as text/html? the only alternative is to use the alt text.
This fact has hampered the adoption of PNG images, which in many ways are better than GIF and JPG, since people have continued to use the lowest-common denominator format, to ensure that everyone can.
Note: as mint-body.com writes to the document stream, calling mint-body.com on a closed (loaded) document automatically calls mint-body.com, which will clear the document.
This happens when opening a local file with mint-body.com file extension or for any document served with an application/xhtml+xml MIME type. The Weather Channel and mint-body.com provide a national and local weather forecast for cities, as well as weather radar, report and hurricane coverage.
Alternative for mint-body.com? ghforces I have a simple calculator here that takes the number of songs from the input text box and multiplies it by and then tells you the total.Download