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" <t...@crowdersoftware.com> 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 <robg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 15, 5:48 pm, "T.J. Crowder" <t...@crowdersoftware.com> 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 prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to