Markup vs. scripting:\nIs XML a scripting language that (with XHTML) could replace HTML, or is XML a markup meta-language rather than a scripting language?

Introduction / Context:
This question distinguishes between markup and scripting. It asks whether XML is a scripting language poised to replace HTML, or a markup meta-language used to define structured data.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• XML stands for Extensible Markup Language and defines rules for encoding documents in a machine-readable, self-describing format.
• HTML is a markup language for presentation of documents in web browsers.
• Scripting languages (e.g., JavaScript) provide logic and dynamic behavior.

Concept / Approach:
XML is not a scripting language; it provides structure and semantics for data. It neither executes logic nor controls browser behavior by itself. XHTML is an XML-compliant reformulation of HTML; it did not “replace” HTML on the web. In modern practice, HTML5 remains dominant, while XML is used where structured data serialization is needed (e.g., configuration, feeds, documents, some APIs).

Step-by-Step Solution:
Identify language class: XML = markup meta-language; JavaScript = scripting.Compare roles: HTML/XHTML present content; scripting manipulates behavior.Conclude XML cannot replace HTML as a scripting language because it is not one.

Verification / Alternative check:
Open a raw XML file in a browser; it displays data structure but does not execute behavior. JavaScript, in contrast, runs code.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Calling XML a scripting superset or a replacement for JavaScript is conceptually wrong. Marking “Correct” would conflate distinct language categories.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing XHTML (an XML serialization of HTML) with a wholesale replacement of HTML; assuming any text-based language is “scripting.”

Final Answer:
Incorrect