I've settled with using the XHTML Transitional doctype, but that's only for new documents. For your older documents which don't have correct syntax, I agree with the other posts. I wouldn't use a doctype at all and let the browser go into quirks mode and do it's best to render. Slapping an XHTML doctype on those documents won't make them more forward compatible, only fixing the HTML would. It could actually make those documents less compatible because you are in essence lying to the browser about the content, and then hoping the browser doesn't mess up the rendering.
... under what cases should one use an XHTML doctype - practically speaking ... I would say simply, you should use XHTML doctype if you actually have valid XHTML code in your document. With that said here's some resources I find helpful, if you'd like to dig more. http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/doctype.html http://www.quirksmode.org/about/quirksmode.html http://www.alistapart.com/articles/betterliving/ http://www.alistapart.com/articles/doctype/ http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?DOCTYPE Chris -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nando Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 8:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] doctypes, quirks/standards mode and positioning I'll be reworking the markup and the layout approach they've used ... it's just that i anticipate they'll have a reason for using the doctype ... cuz it doesn't jump up there by itself, that i'll need to intelligently and authoritively discuss with them. Much of the code is actually generated out of a Struts jsp app. So i'm looking for resources and experienced opinions ... under what cases should one use an XHTML doctype - practically speaking ... On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:40:43 +0100, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Neerav wrote: > > > so go for html 4 transitional validation if the clients tables will > > always be invalid > > If you know for sure that the markup is going to be invalid, why bother > with a doctype at all? It's a bit like putting a "may contain nuts" > sticker on a bag of peanuts... > > Patrick H. Lauke > _____________________________________________________ > re.dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively > [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] > www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk > http://redux.deviantart.com > > > > ****************************************************** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ > Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge > To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ****************************************************** > > ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ****************************************************** ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
