Phil Beynon wrote: > So is that what I should be aiming for, because I see on the W3C site it > also mentions XHTML 1.1 and 2.0 ?? HTML 5 ! Actually, I'm being semi-serious. XHTML 2 is a dogs dinner and should be avoided at all costs. The W3C is reconvening the HTML working group to look specifically at improving HTML (and persumably XHTML1). Regards, Rob...