Dreamweaver, IE, and FireFox - Web Design

[jqp]

Be expecting strict code you force the user to learn clean code, transitional you can code as sloppy as you want and it will often work in one or two browsers

I agree with the overall point, but I think you're exaggerating the difference between HTML 4.01 Transitional and HTML 4.01 Strict DTDs. They're not that different. But still, it would be silly to learn to depend on something present on one dtd only to move up and discover it's not present in a later dtd.

Now, the difference between XHTML 1.0 Strict and HTML 4.01 Transitional might be a bit more drastic... And yes, I would hope that beginners are learning XHTML - it's cleaner and more particular about syntax. More important than that, though, is to learn to write clean, particular code AND follow good design practices. (Valid code can still be ugly and stupid)

It would be nice if the all browsers just spit out a validation error when there was a error like compilers do with compiled languages rather than try and idiot proof it...

XHTML does. Send a real XHTML document as application/xhtml+xml to Firefox and see.

You can even send an XHTML document as application/xml to IE with a small useless XSL stylesheet and get similar results.

Anywho... I feel an off-topic drift...

[peter.reisio]

Open a file with extension ".xhtml" in IE.

[King Arthur]

Be expecting strict code you force the user to learn clean code, transitional you can code as sloppy as you want and it will often work in one or two browsers, then you get into situations where you see your site in another browser and wonder why it looks so horribly wrong and all. Then you come to a forum asking why it looks wrong and you're told everything you learned is wrong and you need to do it right.

Its like saying why do you expect beginning c/c++ coders to remember a ; at the end of their statements or adding the extra + to i+, to increment an integer, it should be more permissble because its easier. Then later when they're used to not putting that ; or + they notice thier 1 million line "Cross platform" program suite only works in the one linux distrobution they used for testing was because it was coded to handle those mistakes and works on no other OS.

It would be nice if the all browsers just spit out a validation error when there was a error like compilers do with compiled languages rather than try and idiot proof it... It would make browsers rendering faster, a lot of better websites out there and a lot less wanna-be webdesigners.

Thing is you can code as sloppy as you want in Strict just as much as in Transitional. Transitional is nothing more than Strict with the deprecated elements and attributes along with a handful of styling attributes. A coder's habits won't change depending on the standard they use, coding habits are changed by themselves only, not by the standards.

If a coder codes sloppily like a monkey he's just asking for trouble, coding cleanly is a matter of honor as a coder, not following the standards to the letter. As long as the code is clean and the code works with the majority of the browsers out there I don't care whether he/she used Transitional or Strict or XHTML 1.1 or whatever the heck there is or even if he/she broke the W3C standards or not.

I recommended the HTML 4.01 Transitional Doctype because the coder in question is still begining, and thus would most likely prefer to have some breathing room.

If he chooses to work with Strict and it works for him, congrats. If Transitional works for him, congrats. I'm just giving him the possible list of options to choose from.

Anyway... ditto with jonnyq, I do feel an offtopic drift... *Shuts mouth*