So even if a site is written fully XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant, and validates as such, it is still recommended to use HTML 4.01 Strict? Francesco Francesco, Many list members here are going to suggest that you use HTML 4.01 instead as technically what the user agents (browsers in this case) receive is not XHTML as the Recommendation indicates which is as XML. What the browsers almost always receive is text/html. I used to question this whole thing and then I thought to myself there is no real point to use the XHTML anyway since it isn't served as the W3C recommends. Many developers are moved to use XHTML because others have or because it was newer than 4.01. That doesn't mean they were right in either case. Coding in 4.01 Strict is little different from XHTML except for the XML tag closure requirement and not using XHTML 1.0 strict served as html/text goes against the way it was intended to be served. Unfortunately there is much heated debate here often about this as the W3C's recommendations are so easy to interpret with slightly different outcomes for many people. All I would do is try to think about why you chose XHTML for your document. Is it because it is the correct doctype to use, the newer doctype or the popular doctype. I have gone to 4.01 Strict from XHTML 1.0 because I realised I was following the pack because it was the new, cool doctype, used by people I admire and look up to. Just because they are using it doesn't make it right. All the best, Jay Gilmore |
- Re: [WSG] 2 Q: New web site, which DTD I should use? and Com... Jay Gilmore
