Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
On Jan 28, 2008, at 12:01 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote: on Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:22:38 Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: 'The standards' (and the doctypes) were not written with differences in 'rendering' in mind. is this what you know or you believe? is there anything documented about this statement? DOCTYPE sniffing was introduced with IE6 (release 2001). HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0/1.1 both predate this. HTML 4.01 doesn't say anything about DOCTYPE sniffing in either SGML or XML serialisations. Actually, IE 5 Mac was the first to use doctype switching (march 2000) and Gecko (I think Moz 0.6). Philippe --- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
On Jan 28, 2008, at 5:30 AM, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: See: http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2008/01/24/almost-target/ ...for details. Thanks a lot for joining to the discussion George. So based on what Eric states on that page, a strict doctype requires that the correct CSS specifications to be applied to an element such as the img in question. However almost standard mode does not necessarily requires it in SOME cases like above. As I had linked to in my original reply, read also http://hsivonen.iki.fi/almost-precedent/ and http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ Css 2 describes exactly what should happen to an image (inline element, baseline positioning by default). This caused web-compatibility issues (documented in both Henri's article and E. Meyer's article), and that is why 'almost standard mode' was introduced (by Gecko, and later Safari and Opera). 'almost standard mode' is nothing more than a fudge (slightly bending the specs) to compensate for (existing) bad web practices. Philippe --- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
@George: I understand your points very well. Again: doctypes and doctype-switching should *not* have anything to do with how CSS should be interpreted, but the fact that it does affect CSS is the only reason I'm responding on-list. That is exactly what I am reffering to George. Doctype affects CSS. And using CSS you change the presentation of a web page. So Doctype affects the whole layout indirectly if not directly. The role of Doctype is same as the role of an operating system in a PC for example, with a difference that Doctype is decendent of WWW and in the chart and stands one level below its parent and this is why some web sites without Doctype can still breath. ignoring the role of doctype in WWW, is the same as ignoring the role of an operating system. Stating that it is CSS and html doing the job is the same as stating that for instance it is microsoft word that is providing the environment for typing etc. not the operating system. I am trying to be as clear as I can and I hope I am explaining things as good as it should be explained. Now from here I would like to point out an important issue. There has been some people on the internet claiming that Doctype is only for VALIDATION purposes. I believe they are just joking and that they do not see the big picture. @Zach, Well in regards to off topic, well I am not sure Zach. You might want to search for doctype within the list please and see how many threads are there in the list. In the mean time if ADMIN advice me of this, I will defintely close the thread. Zach, i guess I am being misunderstood here. A DTD might not directly specify CSS rules but it is in relation to CSS. Please see my points above. A Doctype might not say anything about rendering but it is related to rendering. Thank you for your off list offer. I will definitely take that into account. @Phil: Thank you for the explanation. Sorry i did just used George's email as the base to reply to all. I did not want to send multiple emails. regards, davoud P.S.: To contribute to my research please visit: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com/stability.html _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
George wrote: I think that is one of the few proper uses one can make of a doctype. Yes that is ONLY one of the proper uses of a Doctype. Thanks a lot for everybody who contributed to this thread. Regards, davoud P.S.:To contribute to my research please visit: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com/stability.html _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: Now from here I would like to point out an important issue. There has been some people on the internet claiming that Doctype is only for VALIDATION purposes. I believe they are just joking and that they do not see the big picture. The big picture is that browsers misuse doctype as a switch-trigger for (what one might call) adjustments to their engines, so they can handle several generations of non-standard and standard based documents without breaking the web. Layout and script handling are altered. The doctype itself _is_ nothing but a declaration of which (X)HTML standard a document's source-code is based on, so one can check conformance - validity if you like. CSS standards - which most visual rendering is based on today - deviated on several points from the default and attribute-based rendering earlier (quirks mode) rendering engines was based on, so the need for a branching mechanism appeared. Once that branching mechanism was introduced there was no going back, and we had the doctype-triggered mode switch. Now we have several modes, and one particular browser needs more modes and is running out of doctypes to switch on and want to introduce new triggers, while the others seem to have kept their path cleaner and can continue building on existing rendering modes. This only to say that the role of doctype is what each browser make of it, so if you want to build up a 'rendering comparison table' you'll have to study the major browser and their respective mode-branches in quite some detail, and must probably go beyond the misused and abused doctype pretty soon. You can start here... http://www.webdevout.net/browser-support ...and add the other rendering modes on top of it. Since I rarely ever validate my (X)HTML source-code, the only purpose the doctype has at my end is to tell my fine-tuned version of HTML Tidy which (X)HTML standard it should clean up my documents against. I think that is one of the few proper uses one can make of a doctype. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
Davoud Tohidy wrote: @George: I understand your points very well. Again: doctypes and doctype-switching should *not* have anything to do with how CSS should be interpreted, but the fact that it does affect CSS is the only reason I'm responding on-list. That is exactly what I am reffering to George. Doctype affects CSS. And using CSS you change the presentation of a web page. No, different Doctypes if needed will render the same CSS differently and Yes, this will change the presentation of a web page [1]. This link has such a table. Now from here I would like to point out an important issue. There has been some people on the internet claiming that Doctype is only for VALIDATION purposes. I believe they are just joking and that they do not see the big picture. They are also very handy to keep the various browsers from going into quirks mode at this moment in time. Doctypes were meant at first to be a transitional measure and should have disappeared over time, but now they are necessary for the next few years at least since legacy content (non-standard code) appears across the Interent and not all browsers are xml compatible (see below point). For browsers like Gecko, Opera and Safari these non-standard modes become more standard over time. A bit like a dog chasing it's tail. regards, davoud BTW, Doctypes can be used in a somewhat improper manner. If a xml prolog appears. ?xml version=1.0 encoding=utf-8? and a document is saved with a .html or .htm extension then a strict unknown Doctype such as XHTML 8.0 will show a page in standard mode in most browsers (Yes, they will be valid by the HTML validator). Possibly even IE8 will render in standard mode without any funky meta. I will not endorse this practice. ;-) If a page includes an xml prolog and is saved as a true xml document with a .xml extension, then no Doctype is needed at all. 1. http://www.quirksmode.org/css/quirksmode.html Alan http://css-class.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
Yes that is ONLY one of the proper uses of a Doctype. Doesn't make much sense to CC the list with quotes like that, when my mails are delayed forever and too often don't ever reach the list. G -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
@ Zach: Thanks a lot for the link Zach . A wonderfull article and definitely a keeper and provides some really good information. However I need more broad comparision table of different doctypes in STANDARD modes. My question is a standards specific questionrather than browser specific one. So the question is that what a specific element, for example an image, is supposed to behave when using different standard doctypes in html and XHTML. In another words what are the specific things which makes different doctypes to be distinguished from each other in html and xhtml. For example you can use a strict or loose dtd in html or a strict and transitional dtd in XHTML. I would like to know what the differences are between these two in html alone and in xhtml alone and also in html and xhtml comparing to each other providing that by xhtml I mean both real xhtml and pretend xhtml. @ David, Thanks for the link david. My question is not related to browsers. Browsers use different doctypes for rendering process. The fact that a browser does have a bug or not, does not change what standards states. That is the browser's problem. To give you in idea of what I am looking for, I gave an example of an image. In strict doctype, there will be a gap under an image, that is what, standards related to a strict doctype has defined to let letters such as q, which might be wrapped around the image, have space. However as far as I know, in other modes such as loose doctype and or in quirks mode the gap will not be present. So I believe when they wrote the standards, they already knew what the differences are between different URIs in different doctypes. I am hoping that w3c might have documented those differences somewhere and that is what I am looking for. regards, davoud Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:38:22 -0500From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision tableYou mean something like http://www.quirksmode.org/css/quirksmode.html#link6 ?Zach On Jan 26, 2008 4:51 PM, DAVOUD TOHIDY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: greetings,Looking for a comprehensive comparision table of renderingdifferent items, such as the gap under an image in strict mode,based on using all available doctypes.Is there anyhting documented on this?thanks for your inputdavoud___css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-dList wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.htmlSupported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
On Jan 27, 2008, at 6:34 PM, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: So I believe when they wrote the standards, they already knew what the differences are between different URIs in different doctypes. I am hoping that w3c might have documented those differences somewhere and that is what I am looking for. 'The standards' (and the doctypes) were not written with differences in 'rendering' in mind. Doctypes only describe the elements that are allowed in html document. They don't prescribe any particular behaviour. e.g. the transitional doctype allows for the target attribute, which doesn't exist in a strict DTD. Browsers, on the other hand, have, for web-compatibility reasons, assigned a particular behaviour for some elements -for a very limited number of elements-. The case of the alignment of images in table- cells is the most (and only ?) significant example. Read: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/almost-precedent/ and the companion piece http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2008/01/24/almost-target/ Also http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ Philippe --- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
on Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:22:38 Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: 'The standards' (and the doctypes) were not written with differences in 'rendering' in mind. is this what you know or you believe? is there anything documented about this statement? and how a standard can be written without conducting any research on how browsers render an x(html) file? The following is from Eric's article at: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/04/14/doctype/index.html?page=2 / Besides the simple difference that strict documents will be treated differently, strict documents will have two big differences from quirky ones. First is that all elements will inherit styles, including table elements, which have a hard time inheriting text colors and styles in quirky mode. Second is that font-size: medium text will be the same size as unstyled text. In quirky mode, unstyled text is the same size as small. // So what i get from what erics states (which is actually the second and third significant examples BTW :) ) in the above statement, is that dtds prescribe a particular behaviour. The above is an example of what a dtd sets as a rule and how a browser acts based on the set of rules defined by dtds. This has nothing to do with if a browser wants to provide web-compatibility or not. If a browser wants to provide web-compatibility or does not want, it will not change the set of rules defined by say a strict dtd. A browser does not have a choice to decide what to do within a certain dtd once it is in and must obey what dtd rules out. However it can decide which mode (standard or quirks) to use only if you do not specify the URI or do not specify doctype at all, or you declare xml encoding before doctype which is the doctype switching for backward compatibility reasons. Browsers, on the other hand, have, for web-compatibility reasons, assigned a particular behaviour for some elements -for a very limited number of elements-. The case of the alignment of images in table- cells is the most (and only ?) significant example. Are you suggesting that it is the browser which defines the standards? Are you suggesting that it is the browser which decides to assign the gap for the image not the strict dtd? if yes I believe that is a wrong statement. If not, then that is what I mean. davoud __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
On 27 Jan 2008, at 14:22, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: on Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:22:38 Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: 'The standards' (and the doctypes) were not written with differences in 'rendering' in mind. is this what you know or you believe? is there anything documented about this statement? DOCTYPE sniffing was introduced with IE6 (release 2001). HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0/1.1 both predate this. HTML 4.01 doesn't say anything about DOCTYPE sniffing in either SGML or XML serialisations. and how a standard can be written without conducting any research on how browsers render an x(html) file? When the current (X)HTML RECs were published there were two distinct behaviours: IE with it's non-standard box model (now quirks mode), and Netscape 4 (with very, very, very little CSS support). Many (if not most) specifications are written from an idealist point of view of everything following the current standards (HTML 5 and CSS 2.1 are notable exceptions to this). The following is from Eric's article at: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/04/14/doctype/index.html?page=2 / Besides the simple difference that strict documents will be treated differently, strict documents will have two big differences from quirky ones. First is that all elements will inherit styles, including table elements, which have a hard time inheriting text colors and styles in quirky mode. Second is that font-size: medium text will be the same size as unstyled text. In quirky mode, unstyled text is the same size as small. // So what i get from what erics states (which is actually the second and third significant examples BTW :) ) in the above statement, is that dtds prescribe a particular behaviour. These CSS rendering differences to this day are totally unstandardised. There is only a de-facto behaviour to follow. That said, HTML 5 defines the differences for HTML parsing in the text/html serialisation. The above is an example of what a dtd sets as a rule and how a browser acts based on the set of rules defined by dtds. This has nothing to do with if a browser wants to provide web-compatibility or not. The DTD _doesn't_ set any rules regarding rendering. The DTD gives information on how to parse the HTML, nothing more (i.e., get a DOM from the raw data). DOCTYPE switches exist precisely for web compatibility — IE6 introduced them so sites developed for IE's non- standardised box model wouldn't break, while allowing new sites to follow the CSS2 REC. Browsers, on the other hand, have, for web-compatibility reasons, assigned a particular behaviour for some elements -for a very limited number of elements-. The case of the alignment of images in table- cells is the most (and only ?) significant example. Are you suggesting that it is the browser which defines the standards? Are you suggesting that it is the browser which decides to assign the gap for the image not the strict dtd? Yes – go and look through the DTD, you will find nothing to do with rendering at all in it. -- Geoffrey Sneddon http://gsnedders.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: on Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:22:38 Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: 'The standards' (and the doctypes) were not written with differences in 'rendering' in mind. is this what you know or you believe? is there anything documented about this statement? In regards to the DOCTYPE, no rendering behavior is defined. As Philippe mentions (in the segment you omitted) the DOCTYPE links to a DTD (Document Type Definition) which simply defines the elements to use, their attributes and hierarchy. If you're curious check these two DTDs (HTML 4.01): http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/strict.dtd http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd and how a standard can be written without conducting any research on how browsers render an x(html) file? I don't know the history for sure (that would be your homework), but as far as I know and at least on recent standards definitions, the 'authority' (W3C) making them works in conjunction with the (biggest) browser vendors as well as experts in various fields (how it turns out, however, it's a different story). The following is from Eric's article at: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/04/14/doctype/index.html?page=2 / Besides the simple difference that strict documents will be treated differently, strict documents will have two big differences from quirky ones. First is that all elements will inherit styles, including table elements, which have a hard time inheriting text colors and styles in quirky mode. Second is that font-size: medium text will be the same size as unstyled text. In quirky mode, unstyled text is the same size as small. // So what i get from what erics states (which is actually the second and third significant examples BTW :) ) in the above statement, is that dtds prescribe a particular behaviour. The above is an example of what a dtd sets as a rule and how a browser acts based on the set of rules defined by dtds. This has nothing to do with if a browser wants to provide web-compatibility or not. Haven't read the article, but only what you mention here... he's talking about Standard-mode vs Quirks-mode. I think that, by making reference to a Standard mode and something else, i.e. Quirks mode, we can assume the latter as not in standard mode. So, what was this about? Well, just that: Quirks-mode document don't adhere to the W3C standards, from their sole definition (i.e. they have even more of a browser-specific and/or undefined behavior). Now, whether a Standard-mode document is rendered as the Standard says or not, that's a different story. You should shook off the idea of different DTDs being the same as Standard and Quirks modes and make a clear distinction between them. If you haven't by now, then investigate a little further. The people here can help you understand it, but you should help them by reading about it yourself. If a browser wants to provide web-compatibility or does not want, it will not change the set of rules defined by say a strict dtd. A browser does not have a choice to decide what to do within a certain dtd once it is in and must obey what dtd rules out. The point here, I believe, is to notice that the Standards don't define *every* situation's behavior, and that's where the browser vendor have to be a little creative about it. So even in Standard mode you may find different behaviors in browsers, and you can't actually comply about it (to them, at least). Now, the more old the browser the more legacy behavior it has, and this is a behavior should be preserved for backward compatibility. Stupid as it is, there are a lot of corporations (and big ones) that had set IE 6 (put attention to 6, please) as the /only allowed/ browser, and some of their people are so used to doing things simply so wrong, that their entire Intranet could break down if MS ever stops supporting that legacy behavior (assuming they'll ever update from IE 6, that is) ---Anyway, this was a little off-topic. However it can decide which mode (standard or quirks) to use only if you do not specify the URI or do not specify doctype at all, or you declare xml encoding before doctype which is the doctype switching for backward compatibility reasons. If you define a *valid* DOCTYPE, the browser should be in Standard mode, if it isn't, then you've found a bug, congratulations! (such as the XML declaration ---/required/ in XML documents--- dropping IE back to Quirks mode despite a DOCTYPE). It's when you don't define a DOCTYPE or is invalid (i.e. wrong) that the browser is set to Quirks mode, and in this case... well... good luck with your work. Browsers, on the other hand, have, for web-compatibility reasons, assigned a particular behaviour for some elements -for a very limited number of elements-. The case of the alignment of images in table- cells is the most (and only ?) significant
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
Are you suggesting that it is the browser which defines the standards? Are you suggesting that it is the browser which decides to assign the gap for the image not the strict dtd? Yes – go and look through the DTD, you will find nothing to do with rendering at all in it. Are you kidding me or what? :) That yes is in your world. It does not matter what DTD hold. Browsers can have some standards for themselves but can not define standards for the world otherwise we would be stuck in the middle of browsers war. Then i guess W3C is kidding us? does'nt it? and that they should leave us alone. what are standards good for? A browser likes to put a gap under a picture and another does not, that is what happens if they were to define standards for us. davoud _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
o.k thanks a lot for everybody's contribution so far. Let me ask you a question. Suppose we use a strict doctype. Back to the image gap example. Now browsers encounter the strict doctype: I would like to know what happens that makes browsers insert the gap in strict mode? davoud _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
On 27 Jan 2008, at 16:10, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: Are you suggesting that it is the browser which defines the standards? Are you suggesting that it is the browser which decides to assign the gap for the image not the strict dtd? Yes – go and look through the DTD, you will find nothing to do with rendering at all in it. Are you kidding me or what? :) That yes is in your world. It does not matter what DTD hold. How else does the DTD decide such presentational matters? Through voodoo? Browsers can have some standards for themselves but can not define standards for the world otherwise we would be stuck in the middle of browsers war. The browsers _do_ define the majority of the web standards. A lot of HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.0 is totally irrelevant in the real world. Then i guess W3C is kidding us? does'nt it? and that they should leave us alone. what are standards good for? Disclaimer: I'm a member of the HTML WG, but these views are my own. A lot of work that has happened at the W3C since it was created has been idealistic, discarding what the real-world is like, assuming that everyone will always follow standards perfectly without flaw, and all implementations follow exactly the editor's intent. What is currently happening in the HTML WG (working on HTML 5) and the CSS WG (whose top priority is currently CSS 2.1) is _specifying_ things like DOCTYPE switches, so there are standards that cover this, and so standards _are_ relevant in the real world (which they currently are not — if you were to implement a browser following exactly HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.0 very, very, very little would be rendered as the author intended). A browser likes to put a gap under a picture and another does not, that is what happens if they were to define standards for us. No, content becomes reliant on a certain behaviour and other browsers copy it; or, a browser invents something (e.g., IE6 introducing quirks/ standards mode) and other browsers copy it as it helps make the browser better. On 27 Jan 2008, at 17:37, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: I would like to know what happens that makes browsers insert the gap in strict mode? The DOCTYPE trigger a non-standardised switch, which affects both HTML and CSS (and, to a lesser extent, DOM). It is a de-facto standard implemented very, very, very similarly across all major browsers. -- Geoffrey Sneddon http://gsnedders.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
That is exactly true. Thanks a lot for helping me out liorean. Now let me ask another question. Why img elements defaulting to display:inline only in strict dtd? why this does not happen in loose dtd or quirks mode? davoud, P.S.: sorry liorean, i needed to reply to the list. Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:03:25 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c) On 27/01/2008, DAVOUD TOHIDY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to know what happens that makes browsers insert the gap in strict mode? The cause is img elements defaulting to display: inline, thus being positioned baseline aligned with the text box they are contained in. -- David liorean Andersson _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
on Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:06:53 Geoffrey Sneddon wrote: The DOCTYPE trigger a non-standardised switch, which affects both HTML and CSS (and, to a lesser extent, DOM). It is a de-facto standard implemented very, very, very similarly across all major browsers. do you mean when we use the strict dtd this happens? I believe i need to go to sleep :). Sorry I am not following you. But I believe liorean gave the correct answer, please use that when replying. davoud _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote: The DOCTYPE trigger a non-standardised switch, which affects both HTML and CSS (and, to a lesser extent, DOM). It is a de-facto standard implemented very, very, very similarly across all major browsers. What? Are you kidding? Or do you mean the de-facto standard on making a choice between modes called quirks mode or standards mode? That's something that major browsers sort-of roughly agree, loosely speaking. The _meanings_ of these modes are, however, undocumented (or with sketchy descriptions that do not actually describe most of the features) and widely diverging. Create an HTML document without a doctype declaration, throw it at IE 6, IE 7, Firefox, and Opera (to consider just some common browsers), and observe quite different behaviors. To prove that I'm wrong, please provide a description of what happens in quirks mode. That is, a document that tells how the browsers behave in that mode. Hint: You won't find one; the best starting point is probably my document http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/quirks-mode.html and it certainly does not describe any de facto standard or even reasonably consistent browser behavior (because there is no such thing). Jukka K. Korpela (Yucca) http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
Thanks Susanne, yes liorean answered it already and Eric describe it on that page as well. I asked another question , and I don't want to repeat myself please reply to my post that I sent based on liorean's comment. thanks davoud Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:38:46 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c) DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote, On 27.01.2008 18:37: Let me ask you a question. Suppose we use a strict doctype. Back to the image gap example. Now browsers encounter the strict doctype: I would like to know what happens that makes browsers insert the gap in strict mode? that's an easy one. ;-) In short: img is by default rendered as an inline element and as such leaves space for the lower part of letters like p,q ... In detail explained here: Images, Tables, and Mysterious Gaps - MDC http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Images,_Tables,_and_Mysterious_Gaps Netscape 6 - that is/was Gecko 0.9x was the first browser to get this right (around 1999), since a lot of legacy content does it wrong, programers of modern browsers decided that they render it the old / wrong way when they encounter a non standard / quirks document. hth Susanne -- http://sujag.de - Webentwicklung und -beratung 10119 Berlin, Tel: 030 - 443 24 173 Zwei Räume in Bürogemeinschaft im Prenzlauer Berg ab sofort frei _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
On 27 Jan 2008, at 18:52, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: Geoffrey Sneddon wrote: The DOCTYPE trigger a non-standardised switch, which affects both HTML and CSS (and, to a lesser extent, DOM). It is a de-facto standard implemented very, very, very similarly across all major browsers. What? Are you kidding? Or do you mean the de-facto standard on making a choice between modes called quirks mode or standards mode? That's something that major browsers sort-of roughly agree, loosely speaking. The _meanings_ of these modes are, however, undocumented (or with sketchy descriptions that do not actually describe most of the features) and widely diverging. Yeah, I meant the actual switch. -- Geoffrey Sneddon http://gsnedders.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
Rafel wrote: David, please configure your e-mail client... well I am using hotmail and i am not sure How I can do that...lol but I will look at the options to see what I can do there. The paragraph above looks like a possible answer to me...How about you? But it is not to me. It is not that the browsers decided to render wrongly when they encounter a loose or non standard mode. It is because either the standards did not ask it (loose dtd) or the standards were not present (quirks mode) so the browsers could get on with their lives. do you happen to have a specific test case.. No i do not. Sorry. ... we can't see your face nor hear the tone of your voice... Well sorry if i sound offensive. I am not at all. In regards to my picture, well I am a handsome guy :) and you are welcome to see it here: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com please let me know if you liked me ...lol.. and in regards to my voice i can record my voice and attach it to my email upon request :) . That is just a joke. so i guess i am doing fine now... regards, davoud P.S.: To contribute to my research please visit: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com/stability.html _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
I may be the only one who feels this way, but what started as a reasonable question has become very off topic (DTDs have nothing to do with CSS). I say this not only because off topic messages are considered annoying by some, but also because it means you are asking the wrong group of people. Those at css-d are bound to know a lot things other than css, but if you're looking for clear answers on dtd-related-topics, I suggest you look to a more html-focused list. You might start with one of the lists through the w3c (the group that produces the specifications). One issue that seems to keep coming up in one form or another is: But it is not to me. It is not that the browsers decided to render wrongly when they encounter a loose or non standard mode. It is because either the standards did not ask it (loose dtd) or the standards were not present (quirks mode) so the browsers could get on with their lives. This statement implies that the doctypes say something about rendering. If you read them (e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/sgml/dtd.html), you can see for yourself what is and isn't discussed. Rendering isn't covered by any (x)html doctype. If you're looking for the standards documents related to rendering, start with the css specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/ ). If you have other questions, or want clarification on what I was asking, you're welcome to email me off of the list. Zach On Jan 27, 2008 3:52 PM, DAVOUD TOHIDY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rafel wrote: David, please configure your e-mail client... well I am using hotmail and i am not sure How I can do that...lol but I will look at the options to see what I can do there. The paragraph above looks like a possible answer to me...How about you? But it is not to me. It is not that the browsers decided to render wrongly when they encounter a loose or non standard mode. It is because either the standards did not ask it (loose dtd) or the standards were not present (quirks mode) so the browsers could get on with their lives. do you happen to have a specific test case.. No i do not. Sorry. ... we can't see your face nor hear the tone of your voice... Well sorry if i sound offensive. I am not at all. In regards to my picture, well I am a handsome guy :) and you are welcome to see it here: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com please let me know if you liked me ...lol.. and in regards to my voice i can record my voice and attach it to my email upon request :) . That is just a joke. so i guess i am doing fine now... regards, davoud P.S.: To contribute to my research please visit: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com/stability.html _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table (my 5c)
DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: [...] So based on what Eric states on that page, a strict doctype requires that the correct CSS specifications to be applied to an element such as the img in question. However almost standard mode does not necessarily requires it in SOME cases like above. Am I correct? Has nothing to do with requirements, and everything to do with finding practical solutions when problems arose. There should (in the ideal and standardized world of web design) not be any differences in how CSS - written or default - is handled in Strict and Transitional - or Quirks mode. However, once the doctype was turned into an element for switching, web designers started using and abusing that switching mechanism without caring one bit about the actual standards. Result: nothing works as it was supposed to and those (browsers) who were hit the hardest took the practical steps necessary to avoid being sidelined - even if this meant bending whatever rules there was or writing new ones that suited their situation. Others made their own decisions on what to do, depending on their situation. Note that MSIE/win never adopted the almost standard mode, and have had no problems with that since they never really adhered to what is known as the standard mode either. MSIE has followed its own anything but standard mode up to present releases, using the doctype to switch on. It is web designers use of that anything but standard mode that has created the need for 'version targeting' in MSIE8. If yes, then that is what I mean. It is the strict doctype which triggers the browsers to behave correctly or in another words render correctly based on the correct CSS specifications. Is that correct? Most browsers agree somewhat on Strict, but - as you can read from the above - the agreements are practical ones and don't assure anything across browser-land - least of all perfect standard compliance. Doctypes with Strict is the relevant standard on source-code level. Doctypes with Transitional points to an intermediate - transitional - version of a standard, where a few elements from older standards are allowed for older documents that are harder to convert intact to a new and Strict standard. Transitional should *not* be used in _new_ documents, unless the quality of Strict can not be obtained - maybe because Strict doesn't allow something that one can not fix and/or do without. That's all there is - or was supposed to be - regarding the whole Transitional vs. Strict standard-versioning. Note that the latest standards and work in progress don't differentiate between Strict and Transitional. They are, or will be, Strict and nothing else. Doctypes were not created to act as a switch-trigger in browsers, but browsers turned it into one since there isn't all that many other ways to figure out if web designers wanted an old non-standard based rendering or a slightly more standard based rendering. The fact that most web designers only wanted a switch trigger since they noticed that browsers reacted on it and that designers were told that they should have a doctype on top, has since muddled the whole issue. See: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_25.html ...for a bit more about how *not* to fix sites by adding a doctype. Again: doctypes and doctype-switching should *not* have anything to do with how CSS should be interpreted, but the fact that it does affect CSS is the only reason I'm responding on-list. - Interpretation-differences are not standardized by the W3C, and documentations elsewhere are next to non-existing. - Relying on existing interpretation-differences is not a very good idea, as most differences are caused by bugs, and the other differences are just practical solutions that may not last. - Serious web developers should use the CSS interpretation in Strict as baseline - after having checked with the relevant CSS standard what's most correct, and adjust all Transitional CSS interpretations to line up with what they want, and can get, in Strict. From there one can style whatever as one like, and can get away with on the real www. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
[css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
greetings, Looking for a comprehensive comparision table of rendering different items, such as the gap under an image in strict mode, based on using all available doctypes. Is there anyhting documented on this? thanks for your input davoud _ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Doctypes rendering comparision table
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:51:16 -0500, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: greetings, Looking for a comprehensive comparision table of rendering different items, such as the gap under an image in strict mode, based on using all available doctypes. Is there anyhting documented on this? Not quite sure what you are after here, Davoud. If you are after differences in rendering behavior that's both comprehensive and cross-browser, I'd think that would be a huge project, especially when you consider all the browser bugs! Perhaps the Wiki can give you a start on finding what you want: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=RenderingMode http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=DocType Cordially, David -- __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
