> I honestly don't think either was the purpose. XHTML existed to make parsing easier. That being the only goal would have resulted in a much simpler standard.

> I honestly don't think either was the purpose. XHTML existed to make parsing easier. That being the only goal would have resulted in a much simpler standard. Extension modules for example is completely orthogonal to that goal. I think that the standards themselves do a good job of describing what motivates them. > The only things you couldn't do in XHTML 1.1 that you could do in HTML were having unclosed tags and using uppercase in tag names. That's it. That's true, but ignores the opposite question—what you could do in XHTML that you could not in HTML.