- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:34:40 +0000
- To: Andreas Frey <hilfesucher@gmx.de>
- Cc: www-validator <www-validator@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 02:22:31PM +0100, Andreas Frey wrote: > I wonder about the different types, strict, transitional. Is there any good > reason to insist on strict. A better question - is they are good reason to use Transitional? > As i want to use the "target" attribute in <a ...> to open a link in > a new window. strict doesn't allow the attribut within the <a> tag. Why do you want that? Its generally considered harmful. http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html http://w3.org/TR/WCAG10/wai-pageauth.html#tech-avoid-pop-ups > So is the strict better/closer to the recommendations than transitional or > just another variation of xhtml? Strict removes action and presentation from the markup language, leaving just structure, semantics and relationships. Action is better handled with JavaScript and presentation with Style Sheets. HTML is SGML based. XHTML is XML based. And that's the only difference between HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0 - both have Strict and Transitional (and Frameset for that matter) variants). Strict and Transitional both form part of the "Recommendation", but it is Strict that is generally recommended these days. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2005 13:34:46 UTC