----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Sealey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A good post Matt, with much food for thought.
> On 22-Feb-01, you wrote:
>
> >> DOCTYPE to pass.
> >
> > 1. Your !DOCTYPE has the following mistakes:
> > a. You have "4.01" instead of "4.0"
>
> 4.01 is a valid HTML revision, which fixes some really annoying (like
> using NAME as well as ID) bugs in the old 4.0 specification. I beleive
> W3C recommended everyone use the latest if they weren't already, and
> publically kicked themselves for introducing such stuff :)
Fair enough! I have the 4.0 spec - I didn`t know there was an update to
it! It`s hard to keep up to date with things.
> > 2. The <TD> tag cannot have the BACKGROUND attribute under HTML4.0
>
> Of course it can. It won't validate, but HTML is more than the
specification
> in most browsers. Can you name a graphical browser that doesn't?
>
> > Netscape and IE have both implemented this non-standard <TD> attribute,
> > but in different ways.
>
> How so? TD BACKGROUND merely loads an image and tiles it in the back of
> the cell in any browser..
Here are the details, as of when I checked them, about a year ago:
1. If you set a background image for the whole table, Explorer uses one
image
for the whole table for the background, while Netscape copies the whole
image into each cell individually.
2. In Explorer, the BGCOLOR attribute overrides the background image -
except in the cell spacing area. But in Netscape the background colors
disappear completely if you specify a background image.
3. You can`t use BACKGROUND in <TR> for Explorer, but Netscape will.
This info may now be out of date. I downloaded the latest Netscape, but its
user interface was so *annoying* (after 20 minutes I still couldn`t work out
how to do such a simple thing as point "Home" to my home page instead of
Netscape`s home page) I doubt I (or many other people) will ever use it.
Even though Voyager is full of bugs, I still *greatly* prefer its interface
to that
of any PC browser I have tried. If Ollie had the staff and resources they
have for developing IE, imagine what a wonderful browser we'd have.
> I don't think it's prudent to be so anal about the validity of your HTML -
> valid HTML does not mean a nice, usable site, nor does it guarantee
> compatibility in browsers (I know Netscape falls over on a lot of standard
> stuff, I was having to fix my sites for some REALLY odd JS parsing bugs in
> Netscape last night, something which by rights and by specifications I
> should not have had to do)
Yes, I am a bit anal retentive I suppose. Also *very* OCD. There would be
an interesting PhD for someone in surveying the psychology of Amiga
diehards. Your comments about compatibility and Netscape are of course
absolutely correct. I *still* think one should use only tags and attributes
supported
by the W3 however. I think that`s just common sense, not just one of the
symptoms of my deep psychological malfuntions.
> If someone wants a !DOCTYPE for to validate their pages, they should get
it
> from the W3C pages and make sure they copy it verbatim. Validation is
> only a method to spot dumbass errors (like spelling mistakes, missing end
> tags) and is not a guarantee of "supportable" code.
Yes I must admit I`ve never used one - I just try my page on several
different
browsers. I`ve never seen the need to use JS, which solves a lot of problems
for me. I`m also a first class hypocrite, since my files don`t have
!DOCTYPEs.
> Write sites how you want. If they don't work in all browsers how you
intend,
> then chances are either your code is f**ked to high heaven, or the browser
> is (*ahem* Netscape *cough*)
IMHO that attitude is why JS is in such a mess. Everyone does "what works"
instead of "according to the standard". As I recall, it was Netscape that
first
developed JS - if that is right, no wonder it is in such disarray.
_____________________________________________________________________
Voyager Mailing List - http://v3.vapor.com/
Voyager FAQ....: http://faq.vapor.com/voyager/
Listserver Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=HELP
Unsubscribe....: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=UNSUBSCRIBE
