RE: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1
Neerav wrote: So now im comfortable using XHTML 1.0 transitional how hard would moving to 1.0 strict and then onto 1.1 be? The move from transitional to strict you wont find hard. This list of tags shows what is and isn't allowed in XHTML 1.0 strict, I do not know of any browser quirks cause by the strict doctype. http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_reference.asp While XHTML 1.0 *may* be served as text/html, XHTML 1.1 *must* be served as application/xhtml+xml. This creates major problems for IE as it only accepts text/html mime. http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php Furthur Reference for XHTML 1.1 http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/ I may be wrong, but I don't think there is any need to have your average website using XHTML 1.1 doctype. Regards Jason Turnbul * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1
The quick test is to simply change the doctype and hit a validator to see what issues arise from your code and then work through them. Remember though that if you're changing from XHTML 1.0 Transitional, then you really need to change the way the document is sent to the browser, the mime type really needs to be changed from text/html to application/xhtml+xml. IE won't be able to use this though so you'll need to do something on the server to present an alternative to this (the dominant) browser. See http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=16A6EBD1-9EEC-4611-98C8-C0F6234B9737 for an explanation and solution (one of many). There are tools that can help you retrofit. I believe HTMLTidy is one of them though I've never used it myself. P -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neerav Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:09 PM To: WSG Subject: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1 Ive found that coding a new site in XHTML 1.0 transitional is easy after some practice, but requires great effort when retrofitting an old site. So now im comfortable using XHTML 1.0 transitional how hard would moving to 1.0 strict and then onto 1.1 be? I already know that moving to XHTML 1.0 strict leads to problems with link targets for new pages etc, are there any other documented problems? -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1
One thing i just noticed about W3Schools... http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_a.asp It states: Differences Between HTML and XHTML NONE but as we all know - XHTML doesnt allow the TARGET attribute... Chris Stratford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Http://www.neester.com Peter Firminger wrote: The quick test is to simply change the doctype and hit a validator to see what issues arise from your code and then work through them. Remember though that if you're changing from XHTML 1.0 Transitional, then you really need to change the way the document is sent to the browser, the mime type really needs to be changed from text/html to application/xhtml+xml. IE won't be able to use this though so you'll need to do something on the server to present an alternative to this (the dominant) browser. See http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=16A6EBD1-9EEC-4611-98C8-C0F6234B9737 for an explanation and solution (one of many). There are tools that can help you retrofit. I believe HTMLTidy is one of them though I've never used it myself. P -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Neerav Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:09 PM To: WSG Subject: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1 Ive found that coding a new site in XHTML 1.0 transitional is easy after some practice, but requires great effort when retrofitting an old site. So now im comfortable using XHTML 1.0 transitional how hard would moving to 1.0 strict and then onto 1.1 be? I already know that moving to XHTML 1.0 strict leads to problems with link targets for new pages etc, are there any other documented problems? -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1
Chris Stratford wrote: but as we all know - XHTML doesnt allow the TARGET attribute... Neither does HTML 4.01 Strict. However, there are many differences between XHTML and HTML [1]. [1] http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] XHTML: 1.0 transitional-1.0 strict-1.1
Chris Stratford wrote: but as we all know - XHTML doesnt allow the TARGET attribute... Let's not perpetuate misinformation here. You _can_ use the TARGET attribute in XHTML. Check the replies to your 8/2/04 post titled XHTML (OT??) You'll find good information in the W3C's XHTML Abstract Modules: When developing documents or defining a profile for a class of documents, content developers can determine which of these modules are essential for conveying their message. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml-modularization-20010410/abstract_modules.html Cheers, -Ben http://www.daemon.com.au/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
