Expect more of it esp. DTD'd exist for various versions and developers can check against that at any time. CSS is not a programming language, however I do agree that "compiled" CSS could work seeing as compilation would compress it. However with the support that CSS has and with the number of essential hacks any CSS needs to have, you'd never manage to compile it without errors.
As others have mentioned, JS IS becoming a compiled language except the browser compiles it for you and not you yourself. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Collectives on Stack Overflow. Learn more. Ask Question. Asked 12 years, 4 months ago. Active 4 years, 3 months ago. Viewed 36k times.
I can see a few challenges: What to do with zillions of existing pages? But what about benefits: Speed. No more "loose" and "half-correct" html. It is either correct or won't compile. Looks the same in every supported browser.
Improve this question. I edited the title and text, to change the word 'interpreted' to 'compiled': I think that 'compiled' is what you meant. Please forgive me and reverse my edit if I was wrong. You have a very good point. I'm a web developer and I've been running in to problems left and right that would perhaps be fixed by your idea. While we're ranting Please also make css object oriented! They should be nestable Should dramatically speed up the lookup table process As they do now, every browser would implement interpretation of the bytecode differently.
So much less room for hacking. So much easier to get a nice development environment, run, test, put it through a browser as a separate "build". Show 1 more comment. Active Oldest Votes. Improve this answer. Dave Markle. HTML contains no programming logic. This is because HTML is not a programming language. In fact, HTML really shines when you use it in conjunction with an actual programming language, such as when using a web framework. HTML is a core tenet of front end web development and is obviously a major aspect of what the user winds up seeing on their computer screen.
This makes a solid understanding of HTML even more useful to have. It is very different from a programming language. Hypertext as the word itself suggests, means text which links to other text, via hyperlinks. These elements come in a huge variety, and are used for a plethora of reasons, depending on the task that needs to be carried out. These elements are enclosed in tags which can change the appearance of the element, or link it to some other place, and overall manipulate text, images, and other content, in order to display it in a format that we want it to be in.
As HTML started to evolve over time, web browsers became too lenient on parsing web page source code. As a result, websites were incompletely rendered between different browsers.
XML is a markup language which defines a set of rules to encode documents in such a way that it can be read and understood by both humans and machines. Here, the developers can enter the world of XML and all of its features while still being rooted in the future compatibility of the content they are designing.
This too is supported by major browsers but might end up needing a stricter parser. Despite being built for the same functions at a base level, there exist some key differences between the two. Let us go through these key differences before diving off the deep end.
First off, HTML had a lot of errors that needed to be corrected when it came to incomplete rendering of content between browsers. Other than these, there are a lot of other more subtle differences in documentation and syntaxes between the two which are not as prominent as these differences are.
The examples there suggest things like font face and page eject, i. Markup can be divided into two major categories: descriptive or logical, or structural markup, which describes the structure of a document in some way, and procedural or physical, or presentational markup, which specifies how the document should be presented physically. Obviously, procedural markup is inevitably device-dependent in some sense, or at least dependent on some general properties of the presentation medium.
Page eject does not make sense in speech. On the other hand, descriptive markup which e. Neither descriptive nor procedural markup is programming , though procedural markup might be somewhat comparable to programming in some respect. And HTML is essentially descriptive; attempts to use it for procedural markup can have rather limited success only, no matter how popular such attempts might be. To compare with natural language constructs, "This car has four doors" is descriptive; "open all the doors!
Neither implies the other. And HTML constructs are generally descriptive, saying things like "this is a heading", instead of saying "show this in such-and-such a way". A browser can be programmed to process descriptive markup in a particular way. A browser might just as well be programmed or configured to display first level headings in normal font but distinctive color, and this might actually be better in a very small handheld device. To take another example, a browser could present a link as underlined blue text that can be clicked on so that a new page then appears.
But that's just one possibility. Another possibility is that an indexing robot has been programmed to follow all links in a document for indexing purposes without anyone clicking or displaying anything.
It is true that there are some currently deprecated constructs in HTML that can be regarded as "commands" or "instructions" in a sense. I wouldn't say so - it is more natural to interpret it as a suggestion , or hint, concerning presentation - but if you do, then you might say that a browser is an interpreter that executes such instructions.
But that would be very remotely if at all analogous to, say, a Perl interpreter executing a Perl program script , which is written in a full-blooded programming language. Note that for example for the width attribute in HTML, the specifications explicitly say that it gives the "suggested" or "recommend" width of a table cell, for example.
And experience shows that browsers actually treat them that way, often overriding the values suggested by authors, sometimes for good reasons, sometimes not.
0コメント