"Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/10/2004 10:54:20 AM:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > OK, Consider this very simple HTML document: > ... > > How could leaving out the doctype make such a definite difference to such > > a simple page? > > The crucial part of my answer was: "If you know for sure that the markup > *is going to be invalid*" > > The example you provide is of valid markup. I tried corrupting the code, > but interestingly, on Firefox and Opera, even when the markup is > blatantly broken, the doctype keeps the browser in standards mode (or > almost-standards mode, as the case may be). Interesting...seems the > wrong behaviour to me, but still interesting... Thanks for the clarification. However, I still don't understand WHY a page requires a doctype declaration (in my case HTML 4.0 transitional) just to make a font-size style cascade from body through to td. To recap: here are two pages, identical except for the presence or absence of a doctype declaration: http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/sub/dev/doctype_test/doctype.html http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/sub/dev/doctype_test/no_doctype.html Regards, Jonathan Cooper Manager of Information / Website Art Gallery of New South Wales Sydney, Australia http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Art Gallery of NSW (ABN 24 934 492 575) or its related entities. ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
