Anyone else confused?
I read through the WSG thread that came from and followed up a lot of
the links and if like me you're making the transition to stronger use
of CSS based development the xhtml v's html issue seems to be
summarised like this:
The issue seems to be whether you are using
Anyone else confused?
As to the purpose of this being resent - yes.
I read through the WSG thread that came from and followed up a lot of
the links and if like me you're making the transition to stronger use of
CSS based development the xhtml v's html issue seems to be summarised
like
Hello The Moose,
Anyone else confused?
As to the purpose of this being resent - yes.
Not sure what you mean by that, where does the suggestion of resent
come in?
I read through the WSG thread that came from and followed up a lot of
the links and if like me you're making the transition to
Hi Peter,
Moose meant re-sent (reposted)... Unfortunate that the word can be
read two
ways.
Aha... re-sent / resent of course ...sorry Moose, although I'm sure you
understand my bemusement at the latter meaning.
As I re-posted it, I'll say why I did. There have been a lot of new
members
Hi Nick,
Ah ok... so the type must be sent in the headers before the page is
even generated (i.e. by the web server). So how would the presence of
meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1
/ or the xml prolog affect the process afterwards?
Presumably by then
they
