Which languages do you use to put your pages together?

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Which languages do you use to put your pages together?

Quick survey...

ronin

4:09 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Okay, so on the weekend I updated the homepage on one of my sites from XHTML 1.0 Transitional to XHTML 1.0 Strict. It only involved a little bit of javascript which checks links for rel="external" and then applies the anchor element a target="_blank" attribute from the DOM. Otherwise the rest of the page was Strict anyway.

As it stands, most pages I write use the HTML 4.01 Transitional doctype. If I added a few trailing slashes and got rid of the target="_blank" attributes I know they would validate as XHTML 1.0 Strict... it's only the target attribute that's holding me back really.

No doubt, I will get rid of all the target's when browsers start supporting CSS3.

But, out of interest, I wanted to ask what doctypes people use, most of the time in October 2004?

Please no comments about forcing new windows. That's a separate discussion and personally, I can't stand it when different sites open up in the same tab over the top of something I'm already reading.

Cook

4:18 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

XHTML 1.0 Transitional.
Cheers,
Cook

victor

5:07 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en">

mincklerstraat

5:07 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

XHTML transitional. It keeps browsers out of quirks mode, allowing nice, tight design, but still allows for new windows when desireable. Since it's a bit newer, it may also deliver reliable cross-client results for longer. I can imagine the day when client programmers ask the question like we ask about NN4: how far back do I wanna program this puppy for? And arbitrarily drawing the line in time somewhere.

py9jmas

5:24 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

a little bit of javascript which checks links for rel="external" and then applies the anchor element a target="_blank" attribute from the DOM

If I understand this right, as soon as your JavaScript runs, your DOM will no longer be valid XHTML Strict. Using JavaScript may fool the validator, but it doesn't make your pages valid.

encyclo

5:24 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Mostly I use:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

But I also have sites which use:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">

I prefer good old HTML to XHTML.

photon

6:35 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

XHTML 1.0 Strict

iamlost

6:49 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Since 01 January 2004 (it was this years resolution):

XHTML 1.0 Strict

vkaryl

7:44 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Mostly 4.01 Strict, still have a couple of sites using 4.01 Transitional (and which are scheduled for "upgrade" over the next couple of months).

Once I have all sites into 4.01 Strict, I'm going to take a week or so and move to XHTML trans at least, and strict where possible. Probably start after the first of the year - nice long dark winter days with snow and a fire in the fireplace....

henry0

8:07 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

<! DOCTYPE html
PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transactional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transactional.dtd">

Robin_reala

8:27 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Personal sites: XHTML1.1 served as application/xhtml+xml. I like going the whole hog :)

At work: Usually HTML4.01 transitional.

tedster

8:47 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

HTML 4.01 strict, with just a touch of javascript here and there. Apologies ronin, if you ever visit one of my sites, but I do open small new windows with extra information. That's why I use the js, although my mark-up will work without it. You just get two short sentences in a whole big window with a back button.

ronin

11:04 pm on Oct 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Not to worry, I like new windows. It's the websites which open up off-site pages in the same tab directly over the top of the page that I'm reading that bothers me.

That's why I have such an issue with the target attribute not being a valid part of XHTML 1.0 Strict markup, even though it remains a valid part of the DOM.

Roll on CSS 3