[FX.php List] Tired of making special solutions for every browser?

[Leo R. Lundgren]

I won't argue with that :-) Not that *I* know what doctype gives the  
best tolerance overall in most webbrowsers, but I believe this is what  
you're addressing, and not that one should use the XHTML doctype and  
think that all is well in the sense I was writing about.

7 maj 2009 kl. 17.26 skrev Gjermund Gusland Thorsen:

> Still after what Lundgren writes, there will most likely be less
> issues for each developer after they start using the standard I
> mentioned,
> and read up on the topic on how to serve the standard correctly.
>
> ggt
>
> 2009/5/7 Tim 'Webko' Booth <tim at nicheit.com.au>:
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> On the top of each of your solutions, you will have less  
>>>>> problems. Why?
>>>>> Because this is the DOCTYPE that most browsers renders in almost  
>>>>> the
>>>>> same way.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like for that to be true, but IE6 (still 20%+ of my users)  
>>>> will fail
>>>> this rather badly - it didn't (and never will) have proper XHTML  
>>>> 1.0
>>>> compliance. If only IE had actually followed the standards in the  
>>>> first
>>>> place!!
>>>>
>>>> Use of IE 6 specific style sheet hacks will get around the worst  
>>>> of it,
>>>> but sometimes I still have to resort to table based layouts for
>>>> very-very-backwards compatability. Which sucks.
>>>
>>> IE always did and always will suck, I agree. Not even in version  
>>> 7, which
>>> isn't THAT old, did Microsoft bother to follow some of the most  
>>> basic parts
>>> of web standards. If it was up to me, everyone would stop using IE  
>>> below
>>> version 8.
>>>
>>> However, one important thing to note regarding the common  
>>> misconception
>>> that writing your site in XHTML is the way to go, is that the  
>>> absolute
>>> majority of developers don't know how to do it, resulting in that  
>>> their site
>>> isn't interpreted as XHTML at all (they just think everything is  
>>> fine
>>> because all they look at is the validator and output XHTML from  
>>> their
>>> server).
>>>
>>> Unless you really feel confident that you know why I'm saying this  
>>> about
>>> XHTML, you are probably serving your XHTML pages as plain HTML and/ 
>>> or your
>>> pages are just tag soup to the browser and/or it interprets it in
>>> quirks/tolerant mode.
>>
>> OK, now I'm intrigued - if I have declared my outputted page as  
>> XHTML in the
>> head, and it then validates vs a decent validator, and it is valid  
>> XML - how
>> is it not XHTML??
>>
>> (Oh and don't get me wrong, for various reasons some of the sites I  
>> am
>> 'responsible' for are very badly broken on that level, but I know  
>> how and
>> why)
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Webko
>> _______________________________________________
>> FX.php_List mailing list
>> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>>
> _______________________________________________
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list


-|