It's an SEO book, not a development book. Anyway (in my opinion), SEO is
just a bunch of hearsay and conjecture.

Anyone who has done any work with CSS in multiple browsers knows that using
the transitional doctype in any language is a no-no. For starters, IE
misinterprets the box model incorrectly and often in any browser positioning
and flow can be interpreted in many, often unpredictable ways..

Whether XHTML or plain HTML, the transitional doctype is just too much work
when dealing with more than one browser.

On one of our newer sites** the XHTML model seems to work well with search
engines, and the code isn't much different at all. It doesn't even fail if
the code is not well-formed.

Joel

** http://www.sirchin.com .. plug plug
  -----Original Message-----
  From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Sarah Barry
  Sent: Wednesday, 6 December 2006 10:17 AM
  To: [email protected]
  Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Why XHTML?


  and yet planetocean in its December SEO book still recommends sticking
with html because:
  quote:

  "Some search engine spiders have had difficulty processing the XHTML
DOCTYPE in the past, so we recommend that you use the HTML 4.01 Transitional
DOCTYPE, ..."

  I did some research (some time ago admittedly) that XHTML delivered as
text/html was very little different to straightforward html and what
mattered was if the mime type was application/xhtml+xml

  ciao
  s
    -----Original Message-----
    From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Mike Kear
    Sent: Wednesday, 6 December 2006 8:41 AM
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Why XHTML?


    Ryan, i use it almost exclusively because:

    [A]  It's more up to date, and therefore more future proof (or perhaps
less future-risky is a more accurate way to put it)
    [B] using the XHTML Strict is stricter and therefore forces me to use a
more concise and valid code (therefore more cross-browser compatible and
fewer cross-browser issues)


    As I understand it, eventually HTML is going to be deprecated in favour
of XHTML,  at which point I want all my work to be valid and working, so I'm
not forced to go back and re-do all my old stuff.  I figure it's better to
get it all up to date now,   Especially since old browsers dont spit it out.

    There's no downside to learning XHTML and potentially some big downside
to using old HTML.

    Cheers
    Mike Kear
    Windsor, NSW, Australia
    Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer
    AFP Webworks
    http://afpwebworks.com
    ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month



    On 12/6/06, Ryan Sabir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
      Hey all,

      How many of you are developing sites in XHTML these days? Is it worth
the extra effort?

      thanks.



    


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"cfaussie" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to