-
Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
My site that I use to host graphics
- Thread starter ServerSonicRep
- Start date
Well, no offense, but I think you should tell someone that using the latest Doctype just because it looks cool is a bad idea.
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
This page is not XHTML1.1. It's HTML4.01 Transitional spiffed up with proprietary attributes and some backslashes.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...set=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&ss=
Why is this such a bad idea? Because the above DTD will most certainly force both IE6, Netscape6 and Moz and its clones into strict rendering mode, meaning the site will probably look ----ed up once filled with content.
Someone would be a lot better off using the following DTD or preferably none at all.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<ADD>
Sorry, I just realized this sounded unfriendly. It wasn't meant that way.
It's just that the days when it didn't matter how you coded and browsers didn't care what DTD you used ended a couple of years ago. If you don't watch out it can end up being really messy in v. 6 browsers. I'm guessing there will be images in tables and with the current setup that's one of the tings that's bound to cause troubles.
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
This page is not XHTML1.1. It's HTML4.01 Transitional spiffed up with proprietary attributes and some backslashes.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...set=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&ss=
Why is this such a bad idea? Because the above DTD will most certainly force both IE6, Netscape6 and Moz and its clones into strict rendering mode, meaning the site will probably look ----ed up once filled with content.
Someone would be a lot better off using the following DTD or preferably none at all.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<ADD>
Sorry, I just realized this sounded unfriendly. It wasn't meant that way.
It's just that the days when it didn't matter how you coded and browsers didn't care what DTD you used ended a couple of years ago. If you don't watch out it can end up being really messy in v. 6 browsers. I'm guessing there will be images in tables and with the current setup that's one of the tings that's bound to cause troubles.
Last edited:
