Re: CSS problem using XHTML doctype.

Thank you, Chuck, this is excellent.  A big help to me in explaining the 
browsers thing to non-(X)HTML coders.

At 09:43 AM 4/16/2003 -0400, Charles A Upsdell wrote:
>At 01:03 AM 04/16/03, you wrote:
>>I understand what you're saying.  But let's say for the moment I tend to
>>think the no-doctype rendering is how it's supposed to look (which I of
>>course don't)....wouldn't the assumption be then that if one were to use the
>>doctype, that its appearance would therefore be uniform throughout the
>>browsers that support that doctype (Netscape 7, Mozilla 1.3 and IE 6)?  And
>>if so, why then would IE 6 render it completely different than the other
>>two?
>
>There are several problems with your assumption that "if one were to use 
>the doctype, that its appearance would therefore be uniform throughout the 
>browsers".
>
>1.  No browser completely implements the standards, with each missing 
>different elements of the standard. (It is useful to note in this context 
>that the 'standards' are actually called 'recommendations'.)
>
>2.  The specifications do not specify exact details of how content should 
>appear:  e.g. with the CSS 'font-size:smaller', the specifications do not 
>say how much smaller, so different browser makers implement such things 
>differently.
>
>3.  The specifications sometimes do not even give a hint of how the 
>content's appearance should be controlled:  e.g. the manner is which LI 
>indentation is controlled is left up to the browser maker, and is 
>different for IE5, IE5/6, Mozilla, and Opera.
>
>4.  Some aspects of the specifications are ambiguous, so different browser 
>makers may interpret the them differently.
>
>5.  The appearance can be affected by user settings, e.g. default fonts 
>and font sizes.
>
>6.   And, of course, each browser has its own unique bugs.
>
>>No matter whether you use the doctype or not, it all seems to be degrees of
>>quirkiness, which brings me to the ultimate (and off-topic) question:  why
>>use doctypes at all if they are still not treated equally among even the
>>latest browsers that allegedly support them?
>
>Three points:
>
>1.  A valid HTML page must have a doctype.
>
>2.  Validation of an HTML page requires a doctype.  (You validate your 
>pages, right?)
>
>3.  The specs do not say that the doctype should control how closely 
>standards should be followed.  Certain browser makers, in an attempt to 
>maintain compatibility both with old pages and with standards-compliant 
>pages, chose to use the doctype as a way of deciding how closely to apply 
>the standards, but different browser makers interpret the doctypes 
>differently.  For more on this, see the Browser News at:
>
>     http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/res_doctype.htm
>
>[]  HTH, Chuck Upsdell
>
>
>

Laurie Davis-Covin, Writer/Editor
National Institute of Standards and Technology
100 Bureau Drive
Admin. Building, Room E 220
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Ph: 301-975-8027

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA