Re: HTML 4.01 Transitional vs. HTML 3.2 Final

On 2/6/04 at 06:52 AM, Captain F.M. O'Lary <ctfuzzy(at)canopy.net> wrote:

> Well. No. Actually it is the W3 specifically saying it really should
> not be used that convinced me.

Can you please provide a reference for that. Several weeks ago you
posted the following page for approval:

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/

where it is stated:

> XHTML 1.0 is W3C's recommendation for the latest version of HTML,
> following on from earlier work on HTML 4.01, HTML 4.0, HTML 3.2 and
> HTML 2.0. . . . 

> XHTML Transitional - Most people writing Web pages for the general
> public to access will want to use this flavor of HTML 4. The idea is
> to take advantage of XHTML features including style sheets but
> nonetheless to make small adjustments to your mark-up for the benefit
> of those viewing your pages with older browsers which can't understand
> style sheets. These include using BODY with bgcolor, text and link
> attributes.

Then you write:

> I don't use transitional DTD's because I read the definition of
> "transitional" at the W3 site. 

I spent almost an hour at http://www.canopy.net/ yesterday. You have a
lot of nice collection of work there. I especially enjoyed many of your
wife's pages. But I also saw an odd collection of doctypes and very few
were 3.2. Some were IE-specific doctypes. Many pages had no doctype. Is
that because you no longer control those pages and your client's
maintain them? It seems a litle inconsistent with your strong positions
on this list. I do admit that I didn't see any transitional DTDs on your
pages. But pages with no doctype??

> I surf with Java Off (as most experienced web surfers I know) and I
> KNOW CSS support stinks.

I assume you mean you mean Java, not javascript. I am an experienced Web
surfer of over 20 years and I leave everything on. I want to take
advantage of everything available on the Internet. If someone's Java
applet is not compatible with my browser and it crashes, I restart the
browser and avoid the page. Hardly a tragedy. I don't use Java on pages
I write.

Ain't nothin' like different points of view to keep this list lively!
:-) Thanks as always, Fuzzy, for your interesting (albeit pre-historic)
commentary.

Ken


http://www.thirdlives.com
ThirdLives

http://simplelives.com
Simplelives

http://amillionlives.com
Lives, the Biography Resource

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