Chris Blake said: >What gives, I can't even pass 100% before writing anything!
You are mixing the syntax of HTML and XHTML. I wouldn't be using XHTML unless I had specific reasons for that. From a pure CSS perspective the reasons for choosing HTML or XHTML are close to nil. However, if you're going to use CSS layout techniques the strict versions of either language gives less surprises and more consistent results. There are circumstances when it could be adviseable to choose the transitional, but I would argue that's rare. HTML 4.01 Strict is what I use: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/ html4/strict.dtd"> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> </head> ----and so on Note there is no trailing "/" in the meta element. ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
