Roberto Santana wrote:
1)
I'm going to create a new website fully standard, CSS, XHTML, WAI...
I'd like to know your opinion about which DTD I should use, advantages and
disadvantages...
XHTML 1.0 Transitional
XHTML 1.0 Strict
XHTML 1.1
????
HTML 4.01 Strict.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd";>
Strict DOCTYPEs are best because most of the deprecated features no
longer need to be used. There are some exceptions, such as the start or
value attributes used in ol and li elements, but you'll usually only
ever need to use a strict DOCTYPE.
Plus, a transitional DOCTYPE will actually trigger Almost Standards Mode
in Mozilla. The differences are minimal and you probably won't even
notice the difference, but just to be on the safe side, full standards
compliance mode is best.
I recommend HTML over XHTML for various reasons I won't go into now, but
mostly because the world isn't ready for XHTML yet. (There's plenty of
discussion of the reasons in the archives and elsewhere on the web if
you want to go looking)
2)
What's your opinion about HTML, CSS and Javascript compresion techniques,
removing spaces, line breaks... these could save a lot of bandwidth in a
high visited website... But this could affect to spiders, Googlebot?
It's a waste of time to strip spaces like that, though there is little
harm in doing so. It only affects the reability for anyone looking at
the source. Just configure your server to use gzip or deflate
compression. There's plenty of info in the Apache docs that'll tell you
how to set that up (assuming you're using Apache).
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
