xhtml table attributes

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

may i ask what supports this assertion? i read thru some of the other
replies. is it mainly because microsoft does not support xhtml? the
company i work uses xhtml transitional. goofy little things like
closed short tags throw an error whne i switch to 4.0 strict.

That's because they are errors.

what arguemnt should i use when trying to convince my colleagues that
4.01 strict is the smartest choice?

Did you catch the other replies in this thread? Show your colleagues my
test page: http://tekrider.net/html/doctype.php

Internet Explorer sees XHTML (sent incorrectly as text/html) as tag
soup. It won't display correctly-sent XHTML at all. Isn't that enough?

 

[Adrienne Boswell]

may i ask what supports this assertion? i read thru some of the other
replies. is it mainly because microsoft does not support xhtml? the
company i work uses xhtml transitional.

Why is the company you work for using transitional? What are they
transitioning to? Transitional is mainly for older pages. If they are
using XHTML because they heard it was the "latest thing", then why are they
still using transitional for new pages? If anything they should be using
Strict XHTML.

goofy little things like
closed short tags throw an error whne i switch to 4.0 strict.

That's not goofy, that's an error.

 

[mcnewsxp]

may i ask what supports this assertion? i read thru some of the other
replies. is it mainly because microsoft does not support xhtml? the
company i work uses xhtml transitional. goofy little things like closed
short tags throw an error whne i switch to 4.0 strict.
what arguemnt should i use when trying to convince my colleagues that
4.01
strict is the smartest choice?
thanks,
mike

In your average world situation where you have colleagues that
need to be convinced for you to do something yourself, don't! Go
with the trendy but otherwise fairly pointless XHTML and just do
it right and serve it as HTML and get it valid and no bad things
will happen to you and you will save yourself a lot of grief.

-- [/QUOTE]

thank you for a logical and thoughtful reply.
will do.

 

[mcnewsxp]

below is the justification my organization uses and they exlained the use of
transitional this way:
"Getting the average <my org> Web site to validate with XHTML strict,
though, with all of the pervasive technologies being used for Web
Development at <my org> (Dreamweaver, Frontpage 2003, Visual Studio,
Homesite, Notepad, etc.) - and the different skill sets of the developers
themselves (some are SMEs rather than Web Devs, some are graphic designers,
etc.) is still probably not a reasonable goal. Compliance with XHTML
Transitional gives enough flexibility for the bulk of our users."

wiki has this to say:

supports XHTML in Internet Explorer 9 (Trident version 5.0). Prior versions
can render XHTML documents authored with HTML compatibility principles and
served with a text/html MIME-type.

also this:
supports HTML 4.01, CSS Level 1, XML 1.0, and DOM Level 1, with minor
implementation gaps.

 

[notbob]

wiki has this to say:

supports XHTML in Internet Explorer 9 (Trident version 5.0). Prior versions
can render XHTML documents authored with HTML compatibility principles and
served with a text/html MIME-type.

I don't which wiki you are referring to, but the wiki on XHTML says this:

"Most web browsers have mature support[16] for all of the possible
XHTML media types.[17] The notable exception is Internet Explorer by Microsoft..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XHTML#Adoption

I can find no mention of "Trident" on the above page, which was
updated 3 days ago.

Even if IE9 did, in fact, support XHTML, who even has it? I don't and
am not likely to get it. OTOH, the Mozilla browsers I do use do
support XHTML, but until M$ user adopt it, it's almost a none entity.

nb

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

below is the justification my organization uses and they exlained the
use of transitional this way: "Getting the average <my org> Web site
to validate with XHTML strict, though, with all of the pervasive
technologies being used for Web Development at <my org> (Dreamweaver,
Frontpage 2003, Visual Studio, Homesite, Notepad, etc.) - and the
different skill sets of the developers themselves (some are SMEs
rather than Web Devs, some are graphic designers, etc.) is still
probably not a reasonable goal. Compliance with XHTML Transitional
gives enough flexibility for the bulk of our users."

Translation: "We employ a large number of people with minimal skills,
and a reluctance to learn." Apparently so, since you're still using the
old, unsupported, abandonware FrontPage. Might be okay for someone's
hobby page.

wiki has this to say:

supports XHTML in Internet Explorer 9 (Trident version 5.0). Prior versions
can render XHTML documents authored with HTML compatibility principles and
served with a text/html MIME-type.

Using an XHTML doctype with text/html causes IE <9 to render "tag soup".
Look it up.

http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm
"People authoring or converting HTML documents to XHTML 1.0 Transitional
claiming that it's "the latest standard" has got to be one of the great
idiocies on the web today. "

also this:
supports HTML 4.01,

Transitional, or Strict?

CSS Level 1,

What about 2.1, 2.2 and up?

XML 1.0, and DOM Level 1, with minor implementation gaps.

Okay, you've fulfilled your obligation to the newsgroup, taking the
information you've learned here to your bosses. It appears they don't
want to listen and learn, so your job is done.

 

[mcnewsxp]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

 

[Rob W.]

Op 22-12-2010 19:03, mcnewsxp schreef:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

It would be a good idea to quote some of the previous posts content
especially the stuff you're replying to.

 

[Rob W.]

Op 22-12-2010 19:03, mcnewsxp schreef:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

Where it says:

"supports XHTML in Internet Explorer 9 (Trident version 5.0).
Prior versions can render XHTML documents authored with HTML
compatibility principles and served with a text/html MIME-type."

To me this means: use HTML.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Translation: "We employ a large number of people with minimal skills,
and a reluctance to learn."

Good one BTS! I have my smile for today.

 

[mcnewsxp]

Good one BTS! I have my smile for today.

--

i don't think anything was translated - just worded differently. i think
the responder knows that there is no changing the situation. big insurance
companies still maintain COBOL code. large companies always have groups of
teams who need to get stuff out quickly and can't wait for the rational
process - ergo GIGO. we're talking about thousands of users, not 10 or 100.
i know that things have improved a lot in the last 5 years and i am
surprised that they have improved at all. i guess what was said is at the
end of the day if the page renders - transitional is ok.
anyway, i'll do my bit to do right.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

i guess what was said is at the
end of the day if the page renders - transitional is ok.
anyway, i'll do my bit to do right.

General Galapagos, "We Dinosaurs are doomed..."

 

[dorayme]

General Galapagos, "We Dinosaurs are doomed..."

Aren't you glad you don't work for large organizations, you
please yourself, you wild modern thing you...?

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Aren't you glad you don't work for large organizations, you
please yourself, you wild modern thing you...?

I bailed just when those ubiquitous grey|beige cubies where becoming all
the rage...