html 4.01, xhtml 1.0 or xhtml 1.1

[Denis McMahon]

Having tried to move a site from badly written html to standards
compliant html recently, I found myself considering, for the first time,
whether to use html 4.01 strict, xhtml 1.0 strict or xhtml 1.1.

Firstly, it's my understanding that xhtml 1.0 is meant to be a "stepping
stone", which means that it's probably not an ideal candidate.

However, it also seems that xhtml 1.1 has a few issues including:

a) ie 6 and 7 (and possibly 8) doesn't recognise the mimetype
b) w3c gives a validation warning if you serve it up with the wrong mimetype
c) I need to find a way to fix code that currently uses code like
"document.getElementById(<id>).innerHTML = [empty] string" to add or
remove text.

So, the choice is the mature and widely supported html 4.01, a stepping
stone (xhtml 1.0), or the not fully supported xhtml 1.1.

I'm inclined to go for html 4.01 strict, can anyone convince me that
this is the wrong decision at the moment?

Denis McMahon

[C A Upsdell]

Denis McMahon wrote:

I'm inclined to go for html 4.01 strict, can anyone convince me that
this is the wrong decision at the moment?

Using HTML 4.01 Strict is a good choice, but make sure you always
validate your pages for both HTML and CSS: browsers apply the standards
more strictly with a Strict DOCTYPE, so are less tolerant of coding errors.

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Denis McMahon wrote:

I'm inclined to go for html 4.01 strict, can anyone convince me that
this is the wrong decision at the moment?

That is a wise choice.

http://tekrider.net/html/doctype.php

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows