XHTML Strict
Moderator: General Moderators
XHTML Strict
Afternoon all.
A developer I work with insists on always using XHTML Transitional 1.0 where as I always use XHTML Strict 1.0, whenever I set this doctype and code to this standard he always sets it to Transitional and says that browsers don't render Strict properly?! Even though I develop and test in major browsers, as I should and never have any rendering issues that would be resolved by changing to Transitional.
What are your thoughts on the matter? I know it's petty but I just prefer XHTML Strict because I am a petulant child.
A developer I work with insists on always using XHTML Transitional 1.0 where as I always use XHTML Strict 1.0, whenever I set this doctype and code to this standard he always sets it to Transitional and says that browsers don't render Strict properly?! Even though I develop and test in major browsers, as I should and never have any rendering issues that would be resolved by changing to Transitional.
What are your thoughts on the matter? I know it's petty but I just prefer XHTML Strict because I am a petulant child.
-
crazycoders
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:48 am
- Location: Montreal, Qc, Canada
Re: XHTML Strict
I didn't know Strict and Transitionnal rendered differently... Isn't that used to "validate" the content and structure of the document? If so, it shouldn't matter if you use strict or transitionnal as long as the output conforms to the doctype you chose.
Re: XHTML Strict
Let him read this article
http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/2 ... es_please/
Browsers render strict fine.
http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/2 ... es_please/
Browsers render strict fine.
http://webstandardsgroup.org/features/tommy-olsson.cfmtommy olsson wrote:In my opinion, using a Strict DTD, either HTML 4.01 Strict or XHTML 1.0 Strict, is far more important for the quality of the future web than whether or not there is an X in front of the name. The Strict DTD promotes a separation of structure and presentation, which makes a site so much easier to maintain.
Re: XHTML Strict
Personally, I use transitional. iframes still have plenty of use in more advanced applications (because of one specific, soon to be deprecated browser), and there is no good replacement yet for the target attribute on links to open a separate window (outgoing link) without javascript.
- JAB Creations
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 2341
- Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:44 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
- Contact:
Re: XHTML Strict
*heart attack*pytrin wrote:Personally, I use transitional. iframes still have plenty of use in more advanced applications
Ok ok I use frames but after discovering responseXML a couple weeks ago their days are numbered!
The transitional doctype is intended for HTML4 backwards compatibility...so it sounds like this guy isn't exactly comfortable with CSS.
Re: XHTML Strict
Don't have a heart attack man. As I explained to you on the PM, there are plenty of uses for iFrames in more advanced web applications that simply can't be replaced.
There are a couple of main uses for iframes in websites and a couple of esoteric use cases. Mainly, I use it for asynchronous (AJAX) file-transfer, which is not possible with traditional AJAX (the alternative is using flash for file transfer, which is another kind of evil). Another use is to cover up IE6 z-index issues (such as layers over select dropdowns and flash objects). Yet another use is for creating widgetized components for embedding in other websites (which include HTML and javascript from another source).
That last point is pretty crucial for embedding such widgets from other services on your own sites as well - Google Maps and analytics use iFrames to work, as many others. Currently it's way too useful to dump it in favor of a strict standard that has no real business benefit.
Re: XHTML Strict
I was under the impression that past browsers have rendered in their 'quriks mode' depending on doctype, I could be wrong though..crazycoders wrote:I didn't know Strict and Transitionnal rendered differently... Isn't that used to "validate" the content and structure of the document? If so, it shouldn't matter if you use strict or transitionnal as long as the output conforms to the doctype you chose.
I'm going to join in the off topic and agree with pytrin I've used iFrames recently too in a page editing part of a cms I'm writing for an inline image upload, as far as I know you can post form upload data via ajax. I can't explain that well so I'll screenshot (I know the user interface is ****, I"ve not finished designing it at all).

- JAB Creations
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 2341
- Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:44 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
- Contact:
Re: XHTML Strict
pytrin, I PMed you afterward my heart attack.
The only ads I have on my site are on my blog when XHTML mime support isn't detected. 
panic!, my site has used an XML declaration for a few years now and that throws IE6 and earlier in to quirks mode. Fortunately IE's quirk's mode in those versions render everything a little bit better.
panic!, my site has used an XML declaration for a few years now and that throws IE6 and earlier in to quirks mode. Fortunately IE's quirk's mode in those versions render everything a little bit better.
Re: XHTML Strict
Iframes etc certainly have their uses! I use them for inline uploads too - however I post the form data to the iframe, instead of having the form inside the frame - but that's just personal preference 
Also @panic! - best arrows ever.
Also @panic! - best arrows ever.
Re: XHTML Strict
haha. yeah they're great. they took me hours 
- Ambush Commander
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:29 pm
- Location: New Jersey, US
Re: XHTML Strict
If I recall correctly, working in strict mode changes things. If you're not doing deep CSS wizardry, it probably won't bite you, but there are rendering differences.