Sorry, "holy war" reads a lot stronger than I meant it to. I'm just frustrated by the utter bollocks that comes out of the W3C more often than not.
-- T.J. On Jun 17, 9:44 am, "T.J. Crowder" <[email protected]> wrote: > @kangax & Rob: > > I didn't mean to step into someone's holy war here. By "seems to be > recommended" I meant what I said earlier, used in the unit tests and > such. > > Let's just change them to something reasonable and move on. > > -- T.J. > > On Jun 17, 7:10 am, RobG <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Jun 15, 5:48 pm, "T.J. Crowder" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Heya, > > > > > I thought it wouldn't come as a surprise that using XHTML makes no > > > > sense... > > > > Hey, HTML and CSS make no sense, let alone XHTML. But that's OT. :-) > > > I'm just saying, the doctype that seems to be recommended is XHTML > > > transitional, > > > By who? Certainly not by those who understand the issues involved - > > search the archives at: > > > news:comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html > > <URL:http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html?lnk= > > > XHTML is pretty much dead, it is essentially replaced by HTML 5. The > > vast majority of documents with an XHTML DOCTYPE are served as text/ > > html, so they are treated by browsers as invalid HTML. > > > It was something of a fad to pretend to use XHTML, it serves no useful > > purpose. I always chuckle when I see an IIS server using the default > > XHTML DOCTYPE, then serve it as text/html. If it was served as XML, IE > > would not know what to do with it since IE is one of the few modern > > browsers that don't know what XML is. A clear case of style over > > substance. > > > > so that's what I use as I don't have a strong reason for > > > doing anything else, and in the XHTML transitional doctype, <br/> is > > > correct and I'm guessing requires less work from the browser. > > > > But of course, you're right that if you don't specify any doctype or > > > if you specify an HTML doctype, you want <br>. I don't know if that's > > > going to be 99% of the time, but it's going to be a big number. > > > Probably 99.999% > > > > The take away for the OP is: Use a doctype (just about any doctype), > > > and then use <br> or <br/> depending on what doctype you're using. > > > The DOCTYPE is pretty much irrelevant except for switching to or from > > standards mode (or "almost" standards mode). Whether the document is > > treated as XML or HTML depends on the response header content type. > > > -- > > Rob > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype & script.aculo.us" 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/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
