|
| |
|
|
alecrust
Posts: 2
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline
 |
Please Review My New Portfolio Site - 7/21/2007 8:04:09
Hi everyone,
I was wondering if you could review my new portfolio site.
When looking through the code you will notice its all on one line. Just click 'View' and Word Wrap to see it all wrapped.
The previous version to this is here, which one do you think is better?
I would appreciate any feedback, however small!
|
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 5915
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: Please Review My New Portfolio Site - 7/21/2007 12:15:05
Too difficult to check with the code all on one line - if you want us to check the markup it would be better to make it easily readable - I don't have View > Word wrap.
So I can only tell you about the first few bits that I saw.
You're using XHTML 1.1 which is a bad idea unless you're doing content negotiation because IE doesn't understand 1.1 if served correctly. So in other words if it's working currently in IE then it's not actually being served as it should. If your webserver starts serving your page as you've suggested it should be served then IE users won't be able to see the page at all.
Drop the DOCTYPE down to XHTML 1.0 to ensure cross-browser compatibility.
If you're using content negotiation (can't check on this machine) then obviously disregard all of the above!
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
|
|
alecrust
Posts: 2
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline
|
RE: Please Review My New Portfolio Site - 7/21/2007 13:21:19
Tailslide,
I have almost always designed to XHTML 1.1. It is exactly the same as XHTML 1.0 strict. Could you explain in more detail why I shouldn't validate to XHTML 1.1?
Thanks
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 5915
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: Please Review My New Portfolio Site - 7/21/2007 14:45:47
It's nothing to do with validation - it's to do with IE not understanding 1.1 unless it's incorrectly served ast text/html.
XHTML 1.1 is NOT the same as XHTML 1.0 - to quote an expert on the subject:
quote:
XHTML 1.0 is a reformulation of HTML 4.01 as an application of XML.
XHTML 1.1 is a reformulation of XHTML 1.0 Strict using Modularization of XHTML.
XHTML 1.0 is just an application of XML which uses the same set of element names and attributes (i.e., semantics) as HTML 4.01. It comes in three different DTDs (Strict, Transitional, Frameset) just like HTML 4.01.
XHTML 1.1 uses a concept called Modularization of XHTML, which means that the definition is split into a number of modules, which you can combine in any combination. There's something called XHTML Basic, for instance, which comprises just the essential modules for simple documents. XHTML 1.1 uses all modules (including a module for Ruby annotations that isn't part of any XHTML 1.0 DTD).
XHTML 1.0 can be served as either text/html or application/xhtml+ according to the specifications. XHMTL 1.1 should only be served as application/xml never as text/html.
IE can't understand any site served as application/xhtml+xml. Many web servers will actually serve sites as text/html whatever you've specified - some will serve them as you request (mine does). Unless you're using content negotiation, if your site is visible in IE then it's because your server is incorrectly serving it as text/html.
If your web server ever decides to serve the site correctly then IE will start to choke on the site (instead of opening it will ask if you want to download the site!).
So for two reasons - because it's incorrect to serve XHTML 1.1 as text/html and because IE doesn't understand it unless you do it'd be much much better to drop down to XHTML 1.0 when you'd be perfectly within your rights to serve it as text/html and IE will understand it properly.
This page - http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/blog.php?xml=yes is a valid XHTML 1.1 page which is correctly served as application/xhtml+xml. See what happens when you try to open it in IE. You're running this risk with your pages - apart from the fact that it's not the correct way to send the page.
In the end there are no advantages to using 1.1 and quite a few drawbacks.
edit: There's nothing to stop you using content negotiation to serve proper XHTML 1.1 to modern browsers and HTML or even XHTML 1.0 to IE browsers - but frankly, I've tried it and it's just waaay too much trouble!
< Message edited by Tailslide -- 7/21/2007 15:02:56 >
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Printable Version 
