Why DTD?

[Axel Siebenwirth]

Hi,

sorry 'bout this newbie question!

1) What is a DTD for. I mean where is the difference between using one or
none.

What are the impact on the browser? What is the benefit of it?
Is HTML or XTHML better?

My best regards,
Axel Siebenwirth

[C A Upsdell]

Axel Siebenwirth wrote:

Hi,

sorry 'bout this newbie question!

1) What is a DTD for. I mean where is the difference between using one or
none.

What are the impact on the browser? What is the benefit of it?
Is HTML or XTHML better?

See http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/res_doctype.htm

[Harlan Messinger]

Axel Siebenwirth wrote:

Hi,

sorry 'bout this newbie question!

1) What is a DTD for. I mean where is the difference between using one or
none.
If you literally are asking what a DTD is for: If a format isn't
defined, how can anyone use it? A DTD is a particular method of defining
a format for SGML/HTML/XML documents.

Perhaps you are asking what a DTD *declaration* is for. Well:

What are the impact on the browser? What is the benefit of it?
Is HTML or XTHML better?

You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're using,
how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure it's
correct? If you *don't* declare the DTD you're using, your average
browser makes an assumption and applies a particular treatment, which
may or may not be right. You're better off telling the browser what
you're doing explicitly.

[Steve Pugh]

Axel Siebenwirth <se***@pearbough.net> wrote:

1) What is a DTD for. I mean where is the difference between using one or
none.
In the context of HTML as used on the web, DTDs are largely
meaningless. No browser bothers to check the DTD.

But I suspect that you didn't actually mean DTD. I think you're
talking about the doctype declaration.
What are the impact on the browser? What is the benefit of it?
In practice some browsers, in fact most of the currently used
graphical browsers, (Win IE6, Mac IE5, Opera 7, Gecko, Safari) use the
doctype as an switch to determine whether they should use standards
mode, almost standards mode or quirks mode to render the page. In
standards mode the browser sticks close(r) to the published HTML and
CSS standards; in quriks mode they emulate the bugs of older browsers;
in almost standards mode (which only Gecko based browsers like Firefox
use) they mostly stick the standards but break a few of them.

Not all browsers are equal and not all standards modes or quirks modes
are equal. In many respects Firefox's quirks mode is closer to the
standards than IE's standards mode.

The actual DTD that may or may not be referenced by the doctype is
largely irrelevant. The browser just looks at the doctype and sees
whether it matches a known pattern and then acts accordingly. So two
different HTML 4.01 Transitional doctypes might trigger different
modes.

In general (and assuming HTML4.01 or XHTML 1.0):
no doctype - quirks mode
Transitional doctype - either depending on exactly which doctype is
used
Strict doctype - generally standards

See http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ for an overview and the linked
documents for more details.
Is HTML or XTHML better?

Neither. There may be times when you want to use XHTML but generally
HTML is safer as you don't need to mangle it to make it usable by tag
soup slurping browsers. In terms of doctype sniffing both HTML and
XHTML doctypes can trigger both quirks mode and standards mode.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

[Axel Siebenwirth]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:14:48 +0000, Steve Pugh wrote:

Axel Siebenwirth <se***@pearbough.net> wrote:

1) What is a DTD for. I mean where is the difference between using one or
none.
In the context of HTML as used on the web, DTDs are largely
meaningless. No browser bothers to check the DTD.

But I suspect that you didn't actually mean DTD. I think you're
talking about the doctype declaration.

What are the impact on the browser? What is the benefit of it?

In practice some browsers, in fact most of the currently used
graphical browsers, (Win IE6, Mac IE5, Opera 7, Gecko, Safari) use the
doctype as an switch to determine whether they should use standards
mode, almost standards mode or quirks mode to render the page. In
standards mode the browser sticks close(r) to the published HTML and
CSS standards; in quriks mode they emulate the bugs of older browsers;
in almost standards mode (which only Gecko based browsers like Firefox
use) they mostly stick the standards but break a few of them.

My problem ist that I try to center a site in the browser according to
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/centering.html.
My page is at http://www.up-2-d8.de/menu.html. The centering of the page
only fully works when I don't specify a document type declaration at all.
When I specify a doctype decl only the horizontal centering works.
Does anybody know what is causing this behavior?
Not all browsers are equal and not all standards modes or quirks modes
are equal. In many respects Firefox's quirks mode is closer to the
standards than IE's standards mode.

The actual DTD that may or may not be referenced by the doctype is
largely irrelevant. The browser just looks at the doctype and sees
whether it matches a known pattern and then acts accordingly. So two
different HTML 4.01 Transitional doctypes might trigger different
modes.

In general (and assuming HTML4.01 or XHTML 1.0):
no doctype - quirks mode
Transitional doctype - either depending on exactly which doctype is
used
Strict doctype - generally standards

See http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ for an overview and the linked
documents for more details.

Is HTML or XTHML better?

Neither. There may be times when you want to use XHTML but generally
HTML is safer as you don't need to mangle it to make it usable by tag
soup slurping browsers. In terms of doctype sniffing both HTML and
XHTML doctypes can trigger both quirks mode and standards mode.

Steve

[me]

"Axel Siebenwirth" <se***@pearbough.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@pearbough.net. ..
[snip]

My problem is that I try to center a site in the browser...

[snip]

Will the following work for you?
Good Luck,
me

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" height="100%"
align="center">
<tr>
<td>
<div align="center">stuff centered vertically and horizontally</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>

[Leif K-Brooks]

Harlan Messinger wrote:

You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're using,
how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure it's
correct?

Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header, file
extension (for local files on OSes where such things matter), and -- for
XML -- namespace decelerations. DTDs should be strictly for validation
and related tasks; they're unrelated to determining content type.

Now, common browsers do some guesswork based on DTD, but that behavior
is non-standard.

[Steve Pugh]

Axel Siebenwirth <se***@pearbough.net> wrote:

My page is at http://www.up-2-d8.de/menu.html. The centering of the page
only fully works when I don't specify a document type declaration at all.
So it only works in quirks mode. That means that you are relying on
browser bugs to get what you want. nOt very future proof.
When I specify a doctype decl only the horizontal centering works.
The doctype you chose must have triggered standards mode.
Does anybody know what is causing this behavior?

height: 100%; doesn't mean what you think it means. In standards mode
table {height: 100%;} when the table is the child of an element with
no height set results in the same as table {height: auto;}

If you want to trigger standards mode (and generally you should) then
add html, body {height: 100%;} as well.

If you want to stay in quirks mode but what to include a doctype (e.g.
for validation) then use one that triggers quirks mode. See the URL I
gave in my previous post.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

[Harlan Messinger]

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Harlan Messinger wrote:

You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're
using, how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure
it's correct?

Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header,

HTTP is not the only means by which data is passed to a process.

[Harlan Messinger]

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Harlan Messinger wrote:

You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're
using, how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure
it's correct?

Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header,

Oh, also (beyond what I wrote in my earlier response): text/html doesn't
tell the browser *which* version of HTML.

file extension (for local files on OSes where such things matter)
Doesn't exactly help the file isn't local and the extension is, say, php.

, and -- for XML -- namespace decelerations. DTDs should be strictly for validation
and related tasks; they're unrelated to determining content type.

Now, common browsers do some guesswork based on DTD, but that behavior
is non-standard.

[C A Upsdell]

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Harlan Messinger wrote:

You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're
using, how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure
it's correct?

Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header, file
extension (for local files on OSes where such things matter), and -- for
XML -- namespace decelerations. DTDs should be strictly for validation
and related tasks; they're unrelated to determining content type.

Now, common browsers do some guesswork based on DTD, but that behavior
is non-standard.

Non-standard, but common enough that we have to pay attention to it:
IE6, Opera, the KHTML-based browsers, and the Gecko-based browsers all
look at the DOCTYPE ... though not quite in the same way.

[Lauri Raittila]

in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Harlan Messinger wrote:

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Harlan Messinger wrote:

You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're
using, how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure
it's correct?

Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header,

Oh, also (beyond what I wrote in my earlier response): text/html doesn't
tell the browser *which* version of HTML.

Yes it does. Doctype declaration don't. Many people use XHTML DTD, but
still write HTML. And browsers use the text/html content type when
deciding which html versio to use, but they ignore dtd.
file

extension (for local files on OSes where such things matter)

Doesn't exactly help the file isn't local and the extension is, say, php.

Well, if file is local, and extension is php, it is good to assume it is
not html.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Utrecht, NL.

[Gus Richter]

Axel Siebenwirth wrote:

Hi,

sorry 'bout this newbie question!

1) What is a DTD for. I mean where is the difference between using one or
none.

What are the impact on the browser? What is the benefit of it?
Is HTML or XTHML better?

The DocType Declaration was useful, as it is today, only for an
interested viewer to be informed by the author declaring as to which
HTML (or XHTML) version the document is composed and supposedly adhering to.

Additionally, todays browsers do a "DocType Sniffing", whereby depending
on the DocType used (or if any) they will render in Quirks or Standards
Mode.

--
Gus

[Lachlan Hunt]

Axel Siebenwirth wrote:

My problem ist that I try to center a site in the browser according to
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/centering.html.
My page is at http://www.up-2-d8.de/menu.html. The centering of the page
only fully works when I don't specify a document type declaration at all.
When I specify a doctype decl only the horizontal centering works.
Does anybody know what is causing this behavior?

That just illustrates why DOCTYPE sniffing is evil, because authors just
pick the mode that gives them the desired result without caring if it's
standards compliant or not! Don't ever trigger quirks mode (ie. always
include a Strict or Transitional DOCTYPE) and learn to do things
properly from the start.

It is very easy to center content. The following will center both
horizontally and vertically:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en">
<head>
<title>Test</title>
<style type="text/css">
html, body { height: 100%; }
#container {
margin:auto;
height: 80%;
width: 80%;

/* The above will horizontally center only.
For vertical centering aswell, add this: */
position: absolute;
top: 0; bottom: 0;
right: 0; left: 0;

background-color: green;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div id="container">test</div>
</body>
</html>

It works in Firefox and Opera; but, sadly, it doesn't work in IE.
However, if you ask in a CSS related group, you might be able to find a
work around.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
http://GetFirefox.com/ Rediscover the Web
http://GetThunderbird.com/ Reclaim your Inbox

[Henri Sivonen]

In article <54********************************@4ax.com>,
Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> wrote:

in almost standards mode (which only Gecko based browsers like Firefox
use)
Safari and Opera 7.5 have almost standards modes, too.
they mostly stick the standards but break a few of them.

The difference between the standards mode and the almost standards mode
is very specific. In the almost standards mode a replaced inline element
does not get an implicit line box in the standard way if there is no
text in the block whose descendant the replaced inline element is.

--
Henri Sivonen
hs******@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html

[Henri Sivonen]

In article <Jt********************@rogers.com>,
C A Upsdell <""cupsdellXXX\"@-@[e-mail]"> wrote:

http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/res_doctype.htm

The statement "This [Opera 7] has the same rendering modes as IE6 //
Windows. For details, see Opera's DOCTYPE page." is not accurate for all
7.x versions--only for 7.0x. See http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/

Opera's own doctype documentation is out of date.

--
Henri Sivonen
hs******@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html

[Axel Siebenwirth]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:31:15 +0000, Steve Pugh wrote:

Axel Siebenwirth <se***@pearbough.net> wrote:

My page is at http://www.up-2-d8.de/menu.html. The centering of the page
only fully works when I don't specify a document type declaration at all.

So it only works in quirks mode. That means that you are relying on
browser bugs to get what you want. nOt very future proof.

When I specify a doctype decl only the horizontal centering works.

The doctype you chose must have triggered standards mode.

Does anybody know what is causing this behavior?

height: 100%; doesn't mean what you think it means. In standards mode
table {height: 100%;} when the table is the child of an element with
no height set results in the same as table {height: auto;}

If you want to trigger standards mode (and generally you should) then
add html, body {height: 100%;} as well.

Thank you very much!
I'll do my best from now on to stay standards compliant.

Axel

[Tim]

"Axel Siebenwirth" <se***@pearbough.net> wrote

My problem is that I try to center a site in the browser... [snip]

"me" <anonymous@_.com> posted:
Will the following work for you?
Good Luck,
me

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" height="100%"
align="center">
<tr>
<td>
<div align="center">stuff centered vertically and horizontally</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>

That won't work for a lot of browsers, because it's just plain wrong. It's
a wrong thing to do, *DON'T* promote the sort of crap that we've being
trying to get rid of for the last several years on a group where people
come looking for answers to the right way to do things.

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.

[Harlan Messinger]

Lauri Raittila wrote:

in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Harlan Messinger wrote:

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Harlan Messinger wrote:
You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're
using, how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure
it's correct?
Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header,
Oh, also (beyond what I wrote in my earlier response): text/html doesn't
tell the browser *which* version of HTML.

Yes it does. Doctype declaration don't.

What?
Many people use XHTML DTD, but
still write HTML.
If I tell you I'm going left, and then I go right, you can tell me I
gave you the *wrong* information, but you can't tell me I didn't give
the information. The DTD declaration does, obviously, indicate which DTD
is being used, which corresponds to the version-specific protocol being
used in the document. Meanwhile, how do you figure that "text/html"
tells you whether HTML 3.2, HTML 4.0, HTML 4.01 Strict, or HTML 4.01
Transitional is being used?

And browsers use the text/html content type when
deciding which html versio to use, but they ignore dtd.

No DTD declaration, browsers go into quirks mode; with declaration,
browsers apply 4.01 Strict rules or 4.01 Transitional rules or whatever
the DTD claims to conform to. How is this "ignoring" the declaration?

[Lauri Raittila]

in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Harlan Messinger wrote:

Lauri Raittila wrote:

in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Harlan Messinger wrote:

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Harlan Messinger wrote:
>You indicate that you're aware that a browser can deal with more than
>one kind of data arrangement. Unless you tell it which one you're
>using, how can it handle the data comes in or check it to make sure
>it's correct?
Document type should be known from the HTTP Content-Type header,

Oh, also (beyond what I wrote in my earlier response): text/html doesn't
tell the browser *which* version of HTML.

Yes it does. Doctype declaration don't.

What?

Many people use XHTML DTD, but
still write HTML.

If I tell you I'm going left, and then I go right, you can tell me I
gave you the *wrong* information, but you can't tell me I didn't give
the information. The DTD declaration does, obviously, indicate which DTD
is being used, which corresponds to the version-specific protocol being
used in the document. Meanwhile, how do you figure that "text/html"
tells you whether HTML 3.2, HTML 4.0, HTML 4.01 Strict, or HTML 4.01
Transitional is being used?

Yes. But *browsers* don't use this information to choose between HTML
versions (tagsoup aka HTML4, and XHTML, these are only flavours of HTML
that browsers handle differently). Browser uses DTD information for
choosing which bugs it will implement. Bugs have nothing to do with HTML
version.

Others, like tools and people will use html version information, and thus
read the DTD. We wouldn't have to think about doctype sniffing, if there
had been no bugs in IE5.

And browsers use the text/html content type when
deciding which html versio to use, but they ignore dtd.

No DTD declaration, browsers go into quirks mode; with declaration,
browsers apply 4.01 Strict rules or 4.01 Transitional rules or whatever
the DTD claims to conform to.

You have misunderstood quirks mode. It has nothing to do with different
versions of HTML, so choosing quirks mode can't be proof that browser
uses doctype to select which html version to parse. Browsers dont apply
strict or transitional rules, ever. All HTML elements are always
supported, as well as few extra ones.

All quirks in quirks mode are irrelated to HTML version - no matter what
html version, they are bugs.


--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Utrecht, NL.

[Harlan Messinger]

Lauri Raittila wrote:
[snipping most of explanation of where Harlan is misunderstanding the
situation]

You have misunderstood quirks mode. It has nothing to do with different
versions of HTML, so choosing quirks mode can't be proof that browser
uses doctype to select which html version to parse. Browsers dont apply
strict or transitional rules, ever. All HTML elements are always
supported, as well as few extra ones.

All quirks in quirks mode are irrelated to HTML version - no matter what
html version, they are bugs.

I see what you mean. Thanks.

[C A Upsdell]

Henri Sivonen wrote:

http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/res_doctype.htm

The statement "This [Opera 7] has the same rendering modes as IE6 //
Windows. For details, see Opera's DOCTYPE page." is not accurate for all
7.x versions--only for 7.0x. See http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/

Opera's own doctype documentation is out of date.

Ah. Thanks for the info.

[me]

"Tim" <ti*@mail.localhost.invalid> wrote in message
news:9v****************************@40tude.net...

"Axel Siebenwirth" <se***@pearbough.net> wrote

My problem is that I try to center a site in the browser... [snip]

"me" <anonymous@_.com> posted:

Will the following work for you?
Good Luck,
me

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" height="100%" align="center">
<tr>
<td>
<div align="center">stuff centered vertically and horizontally</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>

That won't work for a lot of browsers, because it's just plain wrong.

It can't be too wrong because it works in IE6 on Win. I didn't see you offer
a better solution for any browser.
It's
a wrong thing to do, *DON'T* promote the sort of crap that we've being
trying to get rid of for the last several years on a group where people
come looking for answers to the right way to do things.

The right way to do things is not written in stone nor dictated by you or
anyone else for that matter. I will offer any answer I feel works. You will
allow me my opinion and I will allow you yours, no other outcome is possible
and the sooner you accept that fact the better off you'll be.
Signed,
me

[Eric B. Bednarz]

Harlan Messinger <hm*******************@comcast.net> writes:

Axel Siebenwirth wrote:

sorry 'bout this newbie question!
It's not a newbie question; a couple of people who not only wrote
books about 'web standards' but even managed to get them published
haven't found out yet, either.
1) What is a DTD for.

There's a very comprehensive answer to this question dating from 1998:

<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.text.sgml/msg/c3e53dee2c152a81>
If you literally are asking what a DTD is for: If a format isn't
defined, how can anyone use it?
I'm not sure what 'defining a format' means, but the implicit paradigm
that XML is basically just a lot of noise sounds appealing.
Perhaps you are asking what a DTD *declaration* is for.

What is a 'DTD declaration'?
--
Hello world

[Tim]

"me" <anonymous@_.com> posted the wrong answer using tables...

Tim replied:

That won't work for a lot of browsers, because it's just plain wrong.
"me" <anonymous@_.com> posted:

It can't be too wrong because it works in IE6 on Win. I didn't see you offer
a better solution for any browser.
For heck's sake, IE is no example of what's right, and there's hundreds of
thousands of other people, even more, using other browsers. How hard is it
to get your head around that?

I didn't need to offer yet another solution, as other ones have already
been posted.
It's
a wrong thing to do, *DON'T* promote the sort of crap that we've being
trying to get rid of for the last several years on a group where people
come looking for answers to the right way to do things.

The right way to do things is not written in stone nor dictated by you or
anyone else for that matter. I will offer any answer I feel works.

A: The right answer is the right way to do it. The wrong answer is wrong
on many counts, not just because it's the wrong way to do it, it's also
wrong because it doesn't work except in some limited circumstances.
Perhaps you should try reading specifications.

B: Do NOT offer wrong advice in a forum where people come looking for the
right answers. You're doing them a disservice. You're teaching bad habits
to people who haven't picked them up yet, and they're going to have to
learn to unlearn them at some time, which is a hard thing to do.

C: If you don't know what you're talking about then have the common sense
to shut up. Expect to get corrected, and don't be so dumb as to try and
justify your position amongst other people who know better than you. The
only person you're fooling is yourself. You'll get told that you're wrong,
over and over, because it happens to be the case.

Trying to browse the internet is a damn annoying experience because of
fools peddling stupid ideas as the right way to do things. Do the world a
favour and don't contribute to that.

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.

[me]

"Lachlan Hunt" <sp***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:42***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
[code that doesn't work in IE]

It works in Firefox and Opera; but, sadly, it doesn't work in IE...

Why don't you say your solution only works in *your favorite browsers* Mr.
Hunt? Why not tell the truth and say: "I hate IE so users of that browser be
damned".
Signed,
me

[me]

"Tim" <ti*@mail.localhost.invalid> wrote in message
news:qo****************************@40tude.net...
[snip]

What makes you think you can brow beat me into agreeing with you? It is
NEVER appropriate for you to ridicule me or anyone else. You are only making
enemies with your tirades.
Signed,
me

[Tim]

"me" <anonymous@_.com> posted:

What makes you think you can brow beat me into agreeing with you? It is
NEVER appropriate for you to ridicule me or anyone else. You are only making
enemies with your tirades.

What makes you think that arguing with anybody makes you right, and that if
you continue to argue the same point of view that it's going to make it
correct? How long does it take before you realise that your erroneous
suggestions are not good advice to anybody trying to learn how to do
something properly.

To sum up your ill-conceived advice in a nutshell: There is no height
attribute in a table element. That attribute will only have some effect in
broken browsers, and then only sometimes.

Of course, if you knew what you were advising about, you'd understand that.
But you're just too busy trying to keep your ego inflated. It's clear that
you're a troll or a willfully ignorant person from your various postings.
You've ridiculed yourself, nobody else did it. You argued against fact,
and continued to do so.

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.

[me]

"Tim" <ti*@mail.localhost.invalid> wrote in message
news:1q******************************@40tude.net.. .

"me" <anonymous@_.com> posted:

What makes you think you can brow beat me into agreeing with you? It is
NEVER appropriate for you to ridicule me or anyone else. You are only making enemies with your tirades.
What makes you think that arguing with anybody makes you right, and that

if you continue to argue the same point of view that it's going to make it
correct? How long does it take before you realise that your erroneous
suggestions are not good advice to anybody trying to learn how to do
something properly.

To sum up your ill-conceived advice in a nutshell: There is no height
attribute in a table element. That attribute will only have some effect in broken browsers, and then only sometimes.
Be honest and say: "broken browsers like IE". Before I gave my advice I
tried it and it does work in IE6.
Of course, if you knew what you were advising about, you'd understand that. But you're just too busy trying to keep your ego inflated. It's clear that
you're a troll or a willfully ignorant person from your various postings.
If a troll is the person being insulted and ridiculed then I'd be hard
pressed to argue against that point.
You've ridiculed yourself, nobody else did it. You argued against fact,
and continued to do so.

So because I don't take your advice you feel entitled to call me stupid.
That dog won't hunt son. Where I'm from it's the right of civilized free
people to accept or decline advice as they see fit so if it's all the same
to you I'll pass on your so-called advice.

Are you done now?
Signed,
me