Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41
  1. #1
    WDF Staff smoseley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    9,729
    Member #
    819
    Liked
    205 times
    Who ever said that non-compliance with XHTML is bad? I personally avoid XHTML compliance on websites that I want to be fully compatible with as many browsers as possible. The reason is that XHTML creates CSS-dependence for formatting, which in turn creates problems with backwards-compatibility (older browsers rarely render complex CSS correctly, if at all). So there you have it

  2.  

  3. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    9
    Member #
    5519
    Yeah, but most people don't have older browsers anymore. And a lot of people are gearing towards Mozilla as well. Mozilla/Firefox makes it a point to display sites the way they actually are, rather than how IE makes it so "easy" to make a nice looking site. If you properly code your site, you can make it look great in all browsers and be compliant! Hell, take a look at Zeldman's site! :P lol

  4. #3
    Senior Member glyakk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,263
    Member #
    3828
    Liked
    6 times
    Originally posted by transio
    ...The reason is that XHTML creates CSS-dependence for formatting..
    What-you-talking-bout-Willis?

    XHTML is essentially XML with a DTD that makes it act like HTML. So you have the same 'formatting options' in both XHTML as HTML. You dont need CSS to 'format' XHTML. Tables will work just as well in XHMTL as they will in HTML.

    If nothing else it would be good practice to have at least a proper doctype to prevent browsers like IE from going into quarks mode.


  5. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    9
    Member #
    5519
    You have two options when designing websites. You can write clean, fast, standards compliant code. Or you go to every house in the world and upgrade their connection and install your favorite browser. I choose the former.
    ROFLMFAO!!!

  6. #5
    WDF Staff smoseley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    9,729
    Member #
    819
    Liked
    205 times
    Originally posted by TriPixels
    most people don't have older browsers anymore. And a lot of people are gearing towards Mozilla as well.
    That's incorrect. Don't make unsupported statements like that. Show figures if you want to prove a point.

  7. #6
    WDF Staff smoseley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    9,729
    Member #
    819
    Liked
    205 times
    Originally posted by glyakk
    XHTML is essentially XML with a DTD that makes it act like HTML. So you have the same 'formatting options' in both XHTML as HTML. You dont need CSS to 'format' XHTML. Tables will work just as well in XHMTL as they will in HTML.
    Yeah, but XHTML eliminates functionality that WORKS in HTML 4.01, like background images in tables and tds and body margins and such (the list goes on). In the "real world", those techniques are perfectly valid, but in "xhtml world", they're not. Thus, you must depend on CSS to replace the eliminated functionality. Make sense?

    As an example, I'll use the body margins. I KNOW that using the 6 attributes for body margins (leftmargin, marginwidth, etc) will work for ALL browsers. However, some would argue that it's better to use valid XHTML and CSS to replace this, "because it's valid". My argument is that real world functionality should NEVER be replaced with something else ONLY "because it's valid".

    After you get some real-world experience, you'll see what I mean. W3C is not the god of HTML; the browsers are. They determine what functionality should be implemented, whether or not it's adopted by the governing standards organization. In the real world, "standards" are created by the tools and uses made thereof, not by whitepapers.

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,274
    Member #
    4362
    XHTMLcompliant or browser compatible

    Actually this has got to think about, because I'm finishing a design that's XHTML strict valid and uses CSS layout, but I've tested it on IE 5/5.5 in school and it looks weird.
    And was does it serve to have a XHTML strict design if only the 10% of the people are going to see it correctly?

    EDIT (by transio): thread merged.

  9. #8
    WDF Staff smoseley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    9,729
    Member #
    819
    Liked
    205 times
    Well you know where I stand on this. ;-)

  10. #9
    Senior Member DanielOliver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Cornwall, England.
    Posts
    1,202
    Member #
    1879
    Although my site is XHTML compliant, I don't consider it to be hugely important. I wouldn't have made it XHTML Compliant if it was going to effect the way in which my site would be dsiplayed.
    It's a bonus if you can get your site compliant without making any major changes but it's not worth it if it will make your site look worse. Only other designers will appreciate those images proving it is XHTML Compliant. Other site visitors will not make much of it.

    So if you can then why not? But it can cause a lot more problems then it is worth at times.

  11. #10
    Senior Member Brak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    3,413
    Member #
    1217
    Liked
    2 times
    I've found at this point that if you neglect XHTML compliance, you are in fact excluding more users (Mozilla, Opera, all of Linux) than you do if you were to make it compliant (NS4, etc).

    IE 5.5 was releases years ago... To be honest, this month alone, less than 0.1% of my visitors were using IE less than 6.0. The future is here, no need to hold on to old stuff.
    Kyle Neath: Rockstar extraordinare
    The blog | The poetry site | The Spore site


Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Remove Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:17 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com