strict or transitional?

[fluffkomix]

is it better for me to code in strict DTD or transitional DTD for someone who's sort of starting out.

[Relish]

I'd aim for strict simply because it enforces better coding habits.

[smulse]

Strict ftw.

[TheRyoku]

At 6/30/09 12:46 PM, smulse wrote: Strict ftw.

This.

Transitional I believe was created for sites that are doing just that: transitioning (from like, old HTML).

[DannyIsOnFire]

I like the option of opening links in a new window, therefore I use Transitional. There really aren't too many differences though.

[fluffkomix]

At 6/30/09 03:24 PM, DannyIsOnFire wrote: I like the option of opening links in a new window, therefore I use Transitional. There really aren't too many differences though.

you can't do that in strict?

[DannyIsOnFire]

At 6/30/09 03:34 PM, fluffkomix wrote:

At 6/30/09 03:24 PM, DannyIsOnFire wrote: I like the option of opening links in a new window, therefore I use Transitional. There really aren't too many differences though.

you can't do that in strict?

Well you can, but it requires using javascript rather than just sticking target="_blank" on the end of a link.

[citricsquid]

People who force me to open in a new window make me want to go to their house with a long knife and cut all their families genitals off.

[smulse]

I'm going to give you 3 good reasons why you shouldn't force new windows

Ctrl + Click
Mouse wheel click/Centre mouse button
Right click > "Open Link in New Tab"

[citricsquid]

Exactly.

If you force new windows you change how everything acts as default. If you leave it as same window they can: middle click for new tab, right click > new window for new window or just click for same window, if you force new window they have no way of opening in the same window. Dictating your visitors browsing habits to them will put people off.

[Jon-86]

But what if your linking to an external site? In that case, having it open in a new window is good in my opinion as it means its easier to get back to your site.

[citricsquid]

At 6/30/09 04:42 PM, Jon-86 wrote: But what if your linking to an external site? In that case, having it open in a new window is good in my opinion as it means its easier to get back to your site.

Surely the user should have a choice about that?

[Jon-86]

At 6/30/09 04:44 PM, citricsquid wrote:

At 6/30/09 04:42 PM, Jon-86 wrote: But what if your linking to an external site? In that case, having it open in a new window is good in my opinion as it means its easier to get back to your site.

Surely the user should have a choice about that?

Not everyone knows browsing shortcuts or falls into a particular habbit. If I'm on a site like Newgrounds for example and someone posts a link about something, I would rather it just opened in a new window so NG would still be on its own tab and I could explore the link without having to click back a few times to get back to NG

[Super-Yombario]

How about the idiot's choice? You seem to be acting like one for someone who doesn't seem to care for those who don't know how to open a new tab, or those who use a tabless browser (<=IE6)

[djconnect]

At 6/30/09 04:47 PM, Jon-86 wrote: stuff

So if you want to open in a new window use one of the many short cuts available to you.

[Jon-86]

At 6/30/09 06:50 PM, djconnect wrote:

At 6/30/09 04:47 PM, Jon-86 wrote: stuff

So if you want to open in a new window use one of the many short cuts available to you.

Normally I do right-click and "open in new tab" but I'm talking about this specific example of something being linked that's on another site. I could have some link that may seem to be linking to another part of the same site but when I click it Im taken to a different site. I would rather it open in a new tab in this case as a visual indication that its something on another site.

Average users especially ones older than 30 that have little experience with tabs like the fact things open up and don't just change.

[Super-Yombario]

Mind you he said for a BEGINNER, not someone who already knows everything about HTML and XHTML.

[djconnect]

It makes sense when you bring up the older generations. So the question comes up, should we develop for the older generations or keep moving on?

[Super-Yombario]

Strict XHTML and Transitional XHTML are nothing more than difficulty levels for web development. He's not any worse for playing on easy than he is for playing on expert.

[fluffkomix]

At 6/30/09 07:57 PM, Super-Yombario wrote: Mind you he said for a BEGINNER, not someone who already knows everything about HTML and XHTML.

well by beginner i mean i know all the syntax and how it all works (not completely memorized) but i haven't actually sat down and tried to code anything too complex.

[bgraybr]

At 6/30/09 08:24 PM, Super-Yombario wrote: Strict XHTML and Transitional XHTML are nothing more than difficulty levels for web development. He's not any worse for playing on easy than he is for playing on expert.

Difficulty? Transitional XHTML has no real advantages; it was designed for older sites in transition just like TheRyoku said. XHTML 1.1 isn't really that much harder anyways.

I think it would be better for a beginner to get into good habits rather than learning the "easy" way. I learned HTML from this site, which at that time was extremely outdated. It took me forever to learn the correct way.

[jmbpiano]

At 6/30/09 10:58 PM, bgraybr wrote: I learned HTML from this site, which at that time was extremely outdated. It took me forever to learn the correct way.

O_o

As a general rule of thumb- if you want to learn web design, go to a site that looks like something you might want to design. I hate to be cruel, but that site's just butt ugly.