[Phpwm] new ste

Thu Feb 15 02:26:23 GMT 2007

> We are... And we are learning more and more about XHTML and CSS
> all the time
> hence me being on the computer at 1am.
> http://www.clublinefootball.com/ uses
> XMTML strict throughout.

Hi Dave,

Its coming up with 20 errors on the front page using the W3C validator! :-)
The first few are because you have META instead of meta, XHTML should be
lower case.

Phil

> > >> To make the validator work all you need to do is replace your
> > previous dtd
> > >> and html opening tag with (note the dtd and xml definition are
> > the first
> > >> thing on the page):
> > >>
> > >> <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC
> > >> '-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN'
> > >> 'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd'>
> > >> <html xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml' lang='en' xml:lang='en'>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I've not noticed the <?xml thing all that often; is it often not used?
> > > Or do few people bother reaching that standard?
> > >
> > > (<? also has that annoying property of being the equivalent of <?php
> > > on some stupid servers, and is quite annoying when you find it in
> > > 3rd party code).
> > >
> > > David.
> > >
> > In my limited experience with XHTML I have not used the initial <?xml
> > .... ?> line and my pages have validated successfully as XHTML 1.0
> > Transitional with the W3C validator, the WDG validator and the Total
> > Validator.
> >
> > The W3C XHTML1.0 standard, at http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/, says "An
> > XML declaration is not required in all XML documents; however XHTML
> > document authors are strongly encouraged to use XML declarations in
> > all their documents. Such a declaration is required when the character
> > encoding of the document is other than the default UTF-8 or UTF-16 and
> > no encoding was determined by a higher-level protocol."
> >
> > So that probably explains why we can get away with omitting the <?xml
> > ... ?> stuff even though we should include it!
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Peter Crouch
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > Tel: 0121 523 6756
> > E-mail: pccrouch at bcs.org.uk
> >
>
> Well I've got the homepage passing as XHTML 1.0 transitional. Everything
> scooted left a bit though.
>
> So is that what I should be aiming for, because I see on the W3C site it
> also mentions XHTML 1.1 and 2.0 ??
>
> Also as I understand it the main difference with 'strict' and
> 'transitional'
> is its where you can't use certain tags or elements - such as align -
> anymore and all these functions should only be within the CSS.
> How many people are writing for 'strict' on an `aim to use strict in
> everything` approach?
>
> Phil
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Phpwm mailing list
> Phpwm at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/phpwm
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Phpwm mailing list
> Phpwm at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/phpwm
>