Re: W3C Validation

Julie and Kate:

Oh--Boy!!
This "need" for a doctype statement is a very controversial subject, fully
capable of starting a war. Therefore, I shall try to be as objective as I
can.

Doctype's basically do two things.

1. They tell a browser what "standard" the page was created to match.

2. They tell a multi functional Validator which "standard" to use when
validating the page.

Now it's very true that there are some additional "what about this or
that's" involved--but essentially, the above two statements cover the bulk
of the subject.

Examples: Fuzzy and I are both--in our own way--advocates of Validation.
Problem here is that Fuzzy might choose to use the W3C Validator and thus
would use his "3.2" DTD to tell the Validator which database to use in
validating his pages.

Whereas I allow FrontPage to insert "validated" code on the fly. After all,
that is how a WYSIWYG editor works. Of course, FP validates to its own
database rather than W3C and that causes Fuzzy to grumble a bit.

Because of this, it is obvious we might use a different DTD.

But not necessarily. We both want the browser to know what to expect. In
fact, I have altered my "Normal" template in FP to insert a 3.2 DTD just for
the sake of the Netscape's out there that apparently need the help. (IE
seems to do pretty good on its own and FP would insert what it considers
validated code regardless of a DTD or not.)

So--we now come to the bottom line time.

If you are not concerned with the subjects outline above, then there
probably is no need for a doctype statement. After all, hundreds--maybe
thousands--maybe even a lot more--of web pages are now seemingly doing just
fine without one.

If however, these issues do concern you, then you join the never ending
discussion over WHICH DTD to use. Some insert the "features" they like in
their pages and then sort through the various DTD's and/or available
validators till they find one that allows what they want to do. Some just
argue over them.

Is this really validation?? A good question and one that makes "standards" a
really fun subject, full of sense and no little amount of nonsense. In the
discussion over the weekend, it was mainly this ambiguity that caused Fuzzy
and myself to make so many "friends". [slight clearing of throat]

So--is a DTD absolutely, 100% necessary?? Objectively -- No!

Is it desirable to improve browser support and to communicate with
Validators?? A very resounding Yes!

Do I use one? Absolutely--well, at least most of the time.

Best wishes
Ted Temer
Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
temer(at)c-zone.net
www.temercraft.com/novels/
www.newsredding.com/
www.ramac-rc.org/



> This is interesting because I just completed a Web Design Fundamentals
> Certificate class (after also having completed various hwg classes on HTML
> 4.0, CSS, etc.) and at the end of the class I asked the teacher why we
> hadn't discussed DTD's.  Her response:  " Don't need em!".  I was
surprised
> since this was drilled into our opening hwg lesson.
> Kate Pollara
>
>

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA