Métodos de montagem de uma página web

Diagrama com os diferentes métodos de montagem de uma página web e suas possíveis intersecções

Diagrama com os diferentes métodos de montagem de uma página web e suas possíveis intersecções.

É simples, imagine uma página-web como um ponto que pode estar em qualquer lugar do diagrama, dependendo do seu código.

Esta página pode ser classificada, por exemplo, como:

  • Tableless com código em HTML 4.01 não válido.
  • Tableless com código em HTML 4.01 válido.
  • Tableless com código em XHTML válido e marcação semântica (padrão-web).
  • Layout baseado tabelas e com código em HTML 4.01 não válido.
  • Layout baseado tabelas e com código em XHTML válido.

E não só essas classificações como qualquer uma das intersecções possíveis.


Sobre o fato de HTML 4.01 não ser uma linguagem Padrão Web, cito parte do about do The Web Standards Project.

WaSP Logo

What “Standards?”

When we speak about “standards” for the Web, we mean:

Structural Languages
Extensible Hypertext Markup Language (XHTML) 1.0
Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0
Presentation Languages
Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) Level 1
CSS Level 2
CSS Level 3
Object Models
Document Object Model (DOM) Level 1 (Core)
DOM Level 2
Scripting Languages
ECMAScript 262 (the standard version of JavaScript)
Additional Presentation Languages (Markup)
Mathematical Markup Language (MathML) 1.01
MathML 2.0
Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) 1.0

… as well as emerging standards, such as those for television– and PDA–based browsers.

Ou seja, só XHTML.


[update 002]

Para dizimar de vez a discussão o Bruno Torres enviou um email ao WebStandards Project, segue abaixo a mensagem e sua respectiva resposta:

on Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:08:13PM -0300, Bruno Torres wrote:

I was reading the about page <http://www.webstandards.org/about/> on WaSP web site and I noticed that you don’t mention HTML 4.01 Strict as a standard to markup.

That’s right. We also don’t mention HTML 3.0, which was a standard on
more or less equal footing, but which was superceded by 3.2, 4.0, 4.01,
and finally XHTML, the most recent standard.

As far as I know, HTML 4.01 is a W3C recommendation so it is a standard.

In the loose interpretation of the word, yes.

I mean, HTML 4.01 Strict using the best practices, validating and with semantic markup, not tag soup.

If you want to be specific, it really doesn’t matter whether your markup is valid or uses tables for layout – HTML 4.01 is still a standard. It’s just that your markup isn’t valid and uses methods which are frowned upon.

At any rate, yes, you’re correct to point out that HTML 4.01 is a standard. We don’t mention it because asking browser vendors to support standards was our core mission for several years, and it doesn’t make much sense to pressure them to support old and outdated standards in their new browsers. We’re shooting for XHTML support, not HTML 4.01 support. It’s unrealistic to expect the browser vendors to spend too much time implementing an old standard if even the W3C has abandoned it for all practical intents and purposes and has embraced and advocated an XML-family HTML for the past six years.

Nowadays, we can’t send XHTML as real XHTML (application/xhtml+xml) to all browsers because IE doesn’t support it, so our XHTML 1.0 is sent as text/html and thus interpreted as HTML by the browsers. XHTML 1.0 interpreted as HTML is HTML indeed, on the browser’s viewpoint.

Sure. And most browsers don’t validate or even use XML parsers anyway.

I would like to know why HTML 4.01 Strict is not included and if you plan to include it. And, if I’m wrong in what I said above, I’d appreciate if you sent me a feedback explaining why. Thanks in advance and congratulations for the excellent project.

Thanks! Hope this clears up our position.

Steve – The Web Standards Project

Best wishes! —
Bruno Cunha Torres

Conclusão: O HTML 4.01 é Padrão, porém, está obsoleto e não deve mais ser usado, foi substituído pelo XHTML.

[/update 002]