|
|
Posted by xyZed on 03/18/06 17:18
There is circumstantial evidence that on Sat, 18 Mar 2006 14:54:56
GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> wrote
_______________________________________________________
> xyZed wrote:
>
> > I have Dreamweaver 8 and it's set to validate XHTML 1.0 Transitional
>
> Are these new documents? If so, they should be Strict, rather than
> Transitional, which is for converting (transitioning <g>) old legacy
> documents that have bits you can't change for one reason or another.
>
> Whether you use XHTML 1.0 or HTML 4.0, I will leave for others to
> discuss.
Thanks for all the replies. The Dreamweaver newsgroup weren't
interested for some reason. The Dreamweaver option is, "check
page/validate markup" which implies it will validate markup but it is
a useless tool in my experience unless there is some setting needing
adjusting. It does pick up some errors but lots of obvious ones go
unchecked.
I was writing all my markup in XHTML 1.0 strict but was bothered by
the fact it wouldn't allow me to open affiliate sites in a separate
window. I know it's potentially contentious, but I really think if
someone clicks a link which goes to a different site I would prefer
them to do so in a fresh window. Even as I type it, it sounds a bit
dictatorial though ;-)
Other than the opening of links with target="_blank" my pages
validated with XHTML strict (apart from the useless affiliate
javascript links which is another post) Should I seriously consider
switching to strict?
--
Free washing machine help and advice.
www.washerhelp.co.uk
www.xyzed.co.uk/newsgroups/top-posting.html
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|