SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

View Poll Results: What is your prefer DTD?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • XHTML 1.1

    5 25.00%
  • XHTML 1.0 Strict

    7 35.00%
  • XHTML 1.0 Transitional

    8 40.00%
  • XHTML 1.0 Frameset

    0 0%
  • HTML 4.01

    1 5.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Starting to-digg-in ********* jamesxv7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Island of Puerto Rico @ the Caribbean
    Posts
    873
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    XHTML1.1 or XHTML1.0 Strict

    I just want to know what is the different between XHTML1.1 and XHTML1.0 Strict. Iím planning to build my websites totally dependable of style sheets. I just want to hear your advices.

    Thanks
    James: Ecodig - My Blog - My Gallery
    Validate your sites: CSS - HTML/XHTML
    Without faith you are lost.

  2. #2
    Robert Wellock silver trophybronze trophy xhtmlcoder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    A Maze of Twisty Little Passages
    Posts
    6,316
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's fairly irrelevant whether you use Transitional, Strict or 1.1 to build the site and to how your CSS will interact, what is relevant is the MIME used; if served as an application of XML then the CSS will work differently due to the markup conventions.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Member planetx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Mississauga, Canada
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In XHTML 1.1, the "style" attribute is deprecated, the "target" and "name" attributes are gone from the <a> tag. In 1.1, <font> and <basefont> are gone while in Strict they were deprecated. Otherwise, 1.1 and Strict are almost the same. If you plan on using external CSS, you might as well go with XHTML 1.1.

    I came across a site recently that had a really nice XHTML 1.1 editor. The had a link to an article about the differences between different markup and also talks about the MIME type used to deliver XHTML 1.1 pages. Here is the link:

    http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/120303-1.shtml

    At work we are starting to use Strict but I've been using 1.1 on my personal site for about 6 months and I haven't come across any issues.

    Hope this helps.
    Russ

  4. #4
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    406
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you use 1.1 then there's two things you cannot have, which IMO you cannot do without:

    1 - named anchors

    2 - the "lang" attribute of HTML

    The first one .. well ID-based targets are better and more semantically relevant, but I still use named anchors for crucial things like "skip to navigation", so that at least that works in all browsers, even if other internal anchors aren't universally supported (eg, n4 or earlier don't support id-based targets, and they're not completely reliable in IE when using JAWS - jumping to an ID target may not bring the focus caret with it, so the next Tab-key press may go to whatever comes after the link you just clicked, rather than what's next from where you are now, if you see what I mean)

    But the second one is more pertinent I think - it's vital for accessibility and interoperability that a page declares what language it's in. It's too important to leave to browser support - every UA understands "lang", but "xml:lang" is comparitively new.

    So in my opinion, XHTML 1.1 should not be used.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •