Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
I gave up on trying to use Dreamweaver after my recent upgrade on OS. My copy of MX is having issues (FTP related), and 04 doesn't have enough changes to justify the cost in an upgrade for me. Tried GoLive CS out but wasn't really impressed...just way too much junk for such a simple task. I always coded by hand in code view anyway, so I've decided to go back to a trusty FTP client and BBedit. So much easier now On Feb 25, 2004, at 06:32, JW wrote: Using MX 04. Actually really want to tweak it the way it generates the html codes. Like if I am working with strict then I can tweak it to generate the html the way I want for xhtml strict. Hmm maybe dreamweaver can't be customised that way. Sounds rather far-fetch. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: 25/02/2004 7:22:53 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? On 25 Feb 2004, at 10:40, JW wrote: > Ooo I see! Thanks Andy / Martin! > > Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards? > Which version? I stopped using it at MX. You can tick 'Make all document XHTML compliant' somewhere in preferences. > As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I > achieve it with strict? > There was the exact same discussion a few weeks ago on this board. Javascript was the main option (didn't pay much attention though). Do a search in the list for XHTML (OT??) on 7 Feb. > I guess is preferences really although I do notice lots of website do > not open up in new window but I will always open those links up in new > windows as I prefer to have the original page there to refer back to. > So to open links up in new windows or not is still a question to > me cause I prefer new window. But I will try to please the majority > :) > > With Regards, > Jaime Wong > ~~~ > SODesires Design Team > http://www.sodesires.com > ~~~ > ---Original Message--- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: 25/02/2004 5:53:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? > > > On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote: > > > Hi all > > > > I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 > Strict > > just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it > here > > http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html > > > > Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the > > explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they > > meant! > > No Worries. They are all pretty simple, and pretty minor. > > > > Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an > > SGML parser. > > 1. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" > > (explain...). > >
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Well done Jaime, I remember only a couple of weeks ago when I converted my first one. I nearly wore out my delete key getting rid of all the extraneous crap on my pages. The size of the site is a fraction of what it was now, even though the content is the same. And I bet your site is now cleaner, leaner, faster to load and more consistent than it was. And you make note of how much time you spend on maintaining it, compared to what it used to take you. Welcome to the modern world! Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com From: JW [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2004 3:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? Thank you very much Manuel. Now everything validates and converted all pages on my site except for the favourite links as I have the links to open up in new pages. Now I am confident to convert client's site to XHTML 1.0 Strict. Couldn't do this with everyone's kind assistance! Once again thanks all!!! With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Thank you very much Manuel. Now everything validates and converted all pages on my site except for the favourite links as I have the links to open up in new pages. Now I am confident to convert client's site to XHTML 1.0 Strict. Couldn't do this with everyone's kind assistance! Once again thanks all!!! With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 25/02/2004 11:51:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 15:02, JW escribió: > > Line 89, column 11: there is no attribute "name" (explain...). > > form_service/dodosmail.p Yes, in Strict there's no "name" attribute for the element, use "id" instead. Note that "name" *IS NOT* deprecated for form elements such as , just for the element itself (this is a common misunderstanding) > ^ > Line 91, column 88: document type does not allow element "input" here; > missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", > address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag > ...subject,name,email,country,message" /> > ^ > Enclose the inputs within a block element such as or Example: http://www.simplebits.com/bits/simplequiz/#entry579 Is that all? Congrats, then :) -- Manuel González Noriega Simplelógica, construcción web URL: http://simplelogica.net EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TELEFONO: (+34) 985 22 12 65 Logicola es el weblog de Simplelógica http://simplelogica.net/logicola/ That's right. We said Frontpage. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * . IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 15:02, JW escribió: > > Line 89, column 11: there is no attribute "name" (explain...). >form_service/dodosmail.p Yes, in Strict there's no "name" attribute for the element, use "id" instead. Note that "name" *IS NOT* deprecated for form elements such as , just for the element itself (this is a common misunderstanding) > ^ > Line 91, column 88: document type does not allow element "input" here; > missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", > address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag > ...subject,name,email,country,message" /> > ^ > Enclose the inputs within a block element such as or Example: http://www.simplebits.com/bits/simplequiz/#entry579 Is that all? Congrats, then :) -- Manuel González Noriega Simplelógica, construcción web URL: http://simplelogica.net EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TELEFONO: (+34) 985 22 12 65 Logicola es el weblog de Simplelógica http://simplelogica.net/logicola/ That's right. We said Frontpage. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Thanks Mike I will go and look into the config folder. Didn't know about that. To others in the list sorry for keep asking about validation errors with XHTMl Strict. Feeling kind of embarrassed :/ Thanks to Andy and Martin, I roughly know what to do to make the page validates now except for FORMS!!! Using my site as a test for strict before I work on client's site. http://www.sodesires.com/contact/strict.html Here are some errors .there are more but they are repetitive errors. Am using dodomail (php) for my contact form. My ISP facing some problems with the CGI formmail but I will switch to it once it is resolved. Line 89, column 11: there is no attribute "name" (explain...). 91, column 88: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ...subject,name,email,country,message" /> ^ Line 92, column 61: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ...t type="hidden" name="subject" value="Service Enquiry" /> ^ Line 93, column 61: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ...t type="hidden" name="check_email_address" value="yes" /> ^ Line 95, column 55: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ^ Line 96, column 84: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ...ial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"/> ^ Line 97, column 48: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ^ Line 99, column 60: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ^ Line 100, column 80: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ..."/scripts/css/contactform_error.css"/> ^ Line 102, column 53: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ^ Line 103, column 52: document type does not allow element "input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", "div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag ^ Line 104, column 79: document type does not allow element "input" here; missin
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Yes, I use dreamweaver for all flavours of XHTML. You can customise it by editing the template files if what you want isn’t in the preferences. In a default installation on windows they’re in c:\program files\macromedia\Dreamweaver MX 2004\configuration you can use any text editor to change the default documents there, including the doctypes. Also there’s a command to convert a document to xhtml and when you do the command menu changes from ‘clean up html’ to ‘clean up xhtml’. Then it tidies up all the issues like lower case tags, closing tags, correct nesting etc etc. It’s not perfect but it’s pretty good. Also when your document is xhtml it’ll fix your syntax as you write. If you open a paragraph tag, it’ll automatically close it too. Same with li and td and tr tags. Macromedia have done a LOT of work with the various standards interested parties to get these kinds of features into the product. It’s by far the best version of dreamweaver ever. I was a sceptic until I was forced to learn it to be compatible with a client’s setup and I’m totally sold on it. I’ve let go of most of my other tools now. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com From: JW [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2004 10:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? Using MX 04. Actually really want to tweak it the way it generates the html codes. Like if I am working with strict then I can tweak it to generate the html the way I want for xhtml strict. Hmm maybe dreamweaver can't be customised that way. Sounds rather far-fetch. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Using MX 04. Actually really want to tweak it the way it generates the html codes. Like if I am working with strict then I can tweak it to generate the html the way I want for xhtml strict. Hmm maybe dreamweaver can't be customised that way. Sounds rather far-fetch. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 25/02/2004 7:22:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? On 25 Feb 2004, at 10:40, JW wrote: > Ooo I see! Thanks Andy / Martin! > > Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards? > Which version? I stopped using it at MX. You can tick 'Make all document XHTML compliant' somewhere in preferences. > As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I > achieve it with strict? > There was the exact same discussion a few weeks ago on this board. _javascript_ was the main option (didn't pay much attention though). Do a search in the list for XHTML (OT??) on 7 Feb. > I guess is preferences really although I do notice lots of website do > not open up in new window but I will always open those links up in new > windows as I prefer to have the original page there to refer back to. > So to open links up in new windows or not is still a question to > me cause I prefer new window. But I will try to please the majority > :) > > With Regards, > Jaime Wong > ~~~ > SODesires Design Team > http://www.sodesires.com > ~~~ > ---Original Message--- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: 25/02/2004 5:53:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? > > > On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote: > > > Hi all > > > > I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 > Strict > > just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it > here > > http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html > > > > Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the > > explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they > > meant! > > No Worries. They are all pretty simple, and pretty minor. > > > > Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an > > SGML parser. > > 1. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" > > (explain...). > >
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
On 25 Feb 2004, at 10:40, JW wrote: Ooo I see! Thanks Andy / Martin! Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards? Which version? I stopped using it at MX. You can tick 'Make all document XHTML compliant' somewhere in preferences. As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I achieve it with strict? There was the exact same discussion a few weeks ago on this board. Javascript was the main option (didn't pay much attention though). Do a search in the list for XHTML (OT??) on 7 Feb. I guess is preferences really although I do notice lots of website do not open up in new window but I will always open those links up in new windows as I prefer to have the original page there to refer back to. So to open links up in new windows or not is still a question to me cause I prefer new window. But I will try to please the majority :) With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 25/02/2004 5:53:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote: > Hi all > > I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict > just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here > http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html > > Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the > explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they > meant! No Worries. They are all pretty simple, and pretty minor. > Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an > SGML parser. > 1. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" > (explain...). >
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
JW wrote: As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I achieve it with strict? Hi This started a long thread before, so rather than start it again you should probably check the WSG vault as there are some interesting & valid opinions on this ranging subject from JS to don't (leave it up to the user and their content menu/keystroke). Given that every browser bar one has tabbed browsing, opening windows in new windows (using target) will most likely die out. XP Patch Pack 2 will probably help IE6 catch up to the year 2001 in this regard. Cheers James * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 11:40, JW escribió: > Ooo I see! Thanks Andy / Martin! > > Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards? > > As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I achieve > it with strict? > > When switching DOCTYPEs isn't an option, try the method suggested here http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1041 . -- Manuel González Noriega Simplelógica, construcción web URL: http://simplelogica.net EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TELEFONO: (+34) 985 22 12 65 Logicola es el weblog de Simplelógica http://simplelogica.net/logicola/ That's right. We said Frontpage. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Ooo I see! Thanks Andy / Martin! Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards? As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I achieve it with strict? I guess is preferences really although I do notice lots of website do not open up in new window but I will always open those links up in new windows as I prefer to have the original page there to refer back to. So to open links up in new windows or not is still a question to me cause I prefer new window. But I will try to please the majority :) With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 25/02/2004 5:53:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote: > Hi all > > I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict > just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here > http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html > > Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the > explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they > meant! No Worries. They are all pretty simple, and pretty minor. > Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an > SGML parser. > 1. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" > (explain...). >
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi Jaime On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote: Hi all I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they meant! Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an SGML parser. 1. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" (explain...).
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote: Hi all I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they meant! No Worries. They are all pretty simple, and pretty minor. Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an SGML parser. 1. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" (explain...).
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi all I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading the explanation of errors, I still could not really understand what they meant! Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an SGML parser. Line 11, column 17: there is no attribute "language" (explain...).
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi Nick This is been a concern lately to me as well. 1stly many design firms actually engage other design firms to do their work if they lack the capability in doing them and the list goes on. So it is rather weird having to sub your project to a competitor and so on. Many a times the client looses out in the end as he has no idea what went on behind the screen...(I really hate that) and not to mention how much he is being charged which I have no idea as well. Also the only person I can advise is the person who sub me the project so he will have to relay the message to the other design firm. I am sure many of you have encountered similar scenarios. So how do others handle assignments like this efficiently and yet making sure that the client gets what he wanted and is happy with it? Internal conflicts/interests do occur as well as each company wants everything to be done best for their own interest. The company who sub the project to me may not relay my message as it is (taking back some) so the other design company may have to continue to rely on them to finish the job. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 25/02/2004 8:12:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? Hi Jaime, Slightly off the discussion but I can't help thinking that if I was you in that chain of command... Client <--- Design Firm <--- Subcontracted Freelancer <-- Sub-subcontracted You .I'd be very wary of work that has supposedly "strict" guidelines to follow yet the flow of project information is so stretched. I don't know about everyone else here but I think that clients generally need guidance/recommendation/advice/etc... particularly with regards to standards based development and I cannot see how well you can do that from such a distance. Anyway, not wishing to interfere, just a thought I couldn't hold in and was curious as to whether anyone else thought so. Nick > Now I just need to convince my freelance boss to convince his client > which happens to be a design house to convince their client about the > pro and cons of using XHTML Strict DTD. Just hope the message will not > get messed up down the line. From the corresponding emails I have > seen, the client is one that is very sure of his judgements (even > provided few web links and articles..A list apart was one of them) so > well...it is going to be a challenge to make him understand because he > feels that he has all the relevant info which some aren't actually. > And if all else fails..I guess I better prepare myself in advance > now and start building a test site using xhtml strict. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * . IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi Jaime, Slightly off the discussion but I can't help thinking that if I was you in that chain of command... Client <--- Design Firm <--- Subcontracted Freelancer <-- Sub-subcontracted You ...I'd be very wary of work that has supposedly "strict" guidelines to follow yet the flow of project information is so stretched. I don't know about everyone else here but I think that clients generally need guidance/recommendation/advice/etc... particularly with regards to standards based development and I cannot see how well you can do that from such a distance. Anyway, not wishing to interfere, just a thought I couldn't hold in and was curious as to whether anyone else thought so. Nick Now I just need to convince my freelance boss to convince his client which happens to be a design house to convince their client about the pro and cons of using XHTML Strict DTD. Just hope the message will not get messed up down the line. From the corresponding emails I have seen, the client is one that is very sure of his judgements (even provided few web links and articles..A list apart was one of them) so well...it is going to be a challenge to make him understand because he feels that he has all the relevant info which some aren't actually. And if all else fails..I guess I better prepare myself in advance now and start building a test site using xhtml strict. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi At ALA http://alistapart.com/articles/doctype/ It's about using the right doctype, rather than a background on them - but may help out. Cheers James JW wrote: Uhhh this project requires rebuilding the site from tables to css and to xhtml strict. I can feel my nightmare next to me already. I do not know why W3C validator is validating those codes as error when it looks perfectly fine to me. Unless the codings are very different from transitional DTD? 2morrow I am going to spend my entire day studying this XHTML strict. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 02/25/04 02:59:21 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? I've found for new sites without a lot of forms or pre-existing content, building to XHTML1.0 Strict makes sure I have a disciplined, well structured site that quite easily validates and styles with CSS. I have to keep applying discipline to rid myself of old sloppy coding habits. Validating to XHTML1.0 strict is like my childhood piano teacher sitting next to me with a ruler rapping me on the knuckles when I got my scales wrong. A pain in the neck (well actually knuckles) but splendid way to learn the discipline required to do the job properly. However re-building an existing site to XHTML1.0 Strict is a nightmare. It's far too tight a standard to build to, and not enough benefits to justify the effort involved, unless the client's willing to pay me to do it. (Haven't found one that cares that much yet). In fact for one site, the best I could do was make sure it validated to HTML4.01 transitional. But at least it validated which is more than it did before! I'll tighten it up next time around. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * . * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Uhhh this project requires rebuilding the site from tables to css and to xhtml strict. I can feel my nightmare next to me already. I do not know why W3C validator is validating those codes as error when it looks perfectly fine to me. Unless the codings are very different from transitional DTD? 2morrow I am going to spend my entire day studying this XHTML strict. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 02/25/04 02:59:21 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? I've found for new sites without a lot of forms or pre-existing content, building to XHTML1.0 Strict makes sure I have a disciplined, well structured site that quite easily validates and styles with CSS. I have to keep applying discipline to rid myself of old sloppy coding habits. Validating to XHTML1.0 strict is like my childhood piano teacher sitting next to me with a ruler rapping me on the knuckles when I got my scales wrong. A pain in the neck (well actually knuckles) but splendid way to learn the discipline required to do the job properly. However re-building an existing site to XHTML1.0 Strict is a nightmare. It's far too tight a standard to build to, and not enough benefits to justify the effort involved, unless the client's willing to pay me to do it. (Haven't found one that cares that much yet). In fact for one site, the best I could do was make sure it validated to HTML4.01 transitional. But at least it validated which is more than it did before! I'll tighten it up next time around. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * . IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Thanks JG and Peter. Those info did help lift the fog :) Now I just need to convince my freelance boss to convince his client which happens to be a design house to convince their client about the pro and cons of using XHTML Strict DTD. Just hope the message will not get messed up down the line. From the corresponding emails I have seen, the client is one that is very sure of his judgements (even provided few web links and articles..A list apart was one of them) so well...it is going to be a challenge to make him understand because he feels that he has all the relevant info which some aren't actually. And if all else fails..I guess I better prepare myself in advance now and start building a test site using xhtml strict. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 02/25/04 02:30:59 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? Hi Jaime, you may also find this article of some use. Addy: http://leavesrustle.com/articles/124/ Good luck. Regards, JG > I have always work with XHTML 1.0 Transitional and never really bothered > with Strict until I yesterday when someone sub a project to me saying that > the client wanted the page done using Strict because it is the latest. Is > being the latest the point in using strict? I find it kinda amusing. > > What's the difference actually between the 3 besides how the web generates > the page and how do you decide which to use? Pondered over this because I > have never tried working with strict and now that I have, W3C xhtml > validator is showing bunch of errors which I have no idea why it could be > errors. Basically limiting me to the core. Urggh! Why would a person > decide > when to use Strict? > > Wouldn't using transitional be easier for making it work with certain > database, scripts etc like for e.g. movable type? > > Anyone has a link to an online tutorial with working with strict xhtml > dtds > besides those links at W3C? > > Sorry for this non CSS related topic but just hope the list could help > clear > my confusion :) > > With Regards, > Jaime Wong > ~~~ > SODesires Design Team > http://www.sodesires.com > ~~~ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * . IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
I've found for new sites without a lot of forms or pre-existing content, building to XHTML1.0 Strict makes sure I have a disciplined, well structured site that quite easily validates and styles with CSS. I have to keep applying discipline to rid myself of old sloppy coding habits. Validating to XHTML1.0 strict is like my childhood piano teacher sitting next to me with a ruler rapping me on the knuckles when I got my scales wrong. A pain in the neck (well actually knuckles) but splendid way to learn the discipline required to do the job properly. However re-building an existing site to XHTML1.0 Strict is a nightmare. It's far too tight a standard to build to, and not enough benefits to justify the effort involved, unless the client's willing to pay me to do it. (Haven't found one that cares that much yet). In fact for one site, the best I could do was make sure it validated to HTML4.01 transitional. But at least it validated which is more than it did before! I'll tighten it up next time around. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi Gean Thanks! Now I know what strict is for ;) I really should try to build a test site during free time on strict and make sure it VALIDATES! The requirements sure looks funny to me...all those errors when validated. With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 02/24/04 23:11:40 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use? Hi Jaime, the W3Schools is a useful page. You can learn more about the diferences using this link: http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_dtd.asp Regards, Gean > I have always work with XHTML 1.0 Transitional and never really bothered > with Strict until I yesterday when someone sub a project to me saying that > the client wanted the page done using Strict because it is the latest. Is > being the latest the point in using strict? I find it kinda amusing. > > What's the difference actually between the 3 besides how the web generates > the page and how do you decide which to use? Pondered over this because I > have never tried working with strict and now that I have, W3C xhtml > validator is showing bunch of errors which I have no idea why it could be > errors. Basically limiting me to the core. Urggh! Why would a person > decide > when to use Strict? > > Wouldn't using transitional be easier for making it work with certain > database, scripts etc like for e.g. movable type? > > Anyone has a link to an online tutorial with working with strict xhtml > dtds > besides those links at W3C? > > Sorry for this non CSS related topic but just hope the list could help > clear > my confusion :) > > With Regards, > Jaime Wong > ~~~ > SODesires Design Team > http://www.sodesires.com > ~~~ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * . IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi Jaime, you may also find this article of some use. Addy: http://leavesrustle.com/articles/124/ Good luck. Regards, JG > I have always work with XHTML 1.0 Transitional and never really bothered > with Strict until I yesterday when someone sub a project to me saying that > the client wanted the page done using Strict because it is the latest. Is > being the latest the point in using strict? I find it kinda amusing. > > What's the difference actually between the 3 besides how the web generates > the page and how do you decide which to use? Pondered over this because I > have never tried working with strict and now that I have, W3C xhtml > validator is showing bunch of errors which I have no idea why it could be > errors. Basically limiting me to the core. Urggh! Why would a person > decide > when to use Strict? > > Wouldn't using transitional be easier for making it work with certain > database, scripts etc like for e.g. movable type? > > Anyone has a link to an online tutorial with working with strict xhtml > dtds > besides those links at W3C? > > Sorry for this non CSS related topic but just hope the list could help > clear > my confusion :) > > With Regards, > Jaime Wong > ~~~ > SODesires Design Team > http://www.sodesires.com > ~~~ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Jaime, this is not a CSS list so no apology required. You are definitely on-topic. Unless you want to tell your client to "go all the way" I suggest you tell them that they are clutching for buzzwords by demanding XHTML 1.0 Strict (or anything beyond XHTML 1.0 Transitional). If they continue to demand it and you want to do it properly, you'll need to change the mime-type of the documents sent in the header from the server and do it properly. No argument what-so-ever if you do it properly and actually have a need to use the structured data. I doubt that you do have that need. I recommend (as we at webboy do frequently with (potential) clients touting buzzwords) that you re-educate the client, and if it's only page mark-up you need (with no structured data required in the document) then HTML 4.01 is arguably still the "latest" appropriate mark-up language to use. If you haven't seen it already, please read the Mark Stanton message on the subject. http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg%40webstandardsgroup.org/msg00572.html P * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] DTDS and which to use?
Hi Jaime, the W3Schools is a useful page. You can learn more about the diferences using this link: http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_dtd.asp Regards, Gean > I have always work with XHTML 1.0 Transitional and never really bothered > with Strict until I yesterday when someone sub a project to me saying that > the client wanted the page done using Strict because it is the latest. Is > being the latest the point in using strict? I find it kinda amusing. > > What's the difference actually between the 3 besides how the web generates > the page and how do you decide which to use? Pondered over this because I > have never tried working with strict and now that I have, W3C xhtml > validator is showing bunch of errors which I have no idea why it could be > errors. Basically limiting me to the core. Urggh! Why would a person > decide > when to use Strict? > > Wouldn't using transitional be easier for making it work with certain > database, scripts etc like for e.g. movable type? > > Anyone has a link to an online tutorial with working with strict xhtml > dtds > besides those links at W3C? > > Sorry for this non CSS related topic but just hope the list could help > clear > my confusion :) > > With Regards, > Jaime Wong > ~~~ > SODesires Design Team > http://www.sodesires.com > ~~~ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
[WSG] DTDS and which to use?
I have always work with XHTML 1.0 Transitional and never really bothered with Strict until I yesterday when someone sub a project to me saying that the client wanted the page done using Strict because it is the latest. Is being the latest the point in using strict? I find it kinda amusing. What's the difference actually between the 3 besides how the web generates the page and how do you decide which to use? Pondered over this because I have never tried working with strict and now that I have, W3C xhtml validator is showing bunch of errors which I have no idea why it could be errors. Basically limiting me to the core. Urggh! Why would a person decide when to use Strict? Wouldn't using transitional be easier for making it work with certain database, scripts etc like for e.g. movable type? Anyone has a link to an online tutorial with working with strict xhtml dtds besides those links at W3C? Sorry for this non CSS related topic but just hope the list could help clear my confusion :) With Regards, Jaime Wong ~~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~~ IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
