2 replies [Last post]
Tyssen
Tyssen's picture
Offline
Moderator
Brisbane
Last seen: 5 years 4 weeks ago
Brisbane
Timezone: GMT+10
Joined: 2004-05-01
Posts: 8201
Points: 1386

http://www.dustindiaz.com/skinny-on-doctypes/

Interesting discussion on doctypes (and HTML5).

How to get help
Post a link. If you can't post a link, jsFiddle it.
My blog | My older articles | CSS Reference

Deuce
Deuce's picture
Offline
Guru
Somewhere, USA
Last seen: 2 years 17 weeks ago
Somewhere, USA
Timezone: GMT-5
Joined: 2005-11-20
Posts: 4424
Points: 1843

Two thoughts.

Two thoughts.

The intertube pipes are huge and cheap and getting larger and cheaper. Byte size is starting to count for very little. Especially something on that small of a scale - 3mb background images is still obscene, but not unheard of.

If you DO go with this method, then use a valid doctype to validate against and then change to the "Skinny" version would be the way I would recommend doing things.

all ยป http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/all

Google isn't a bunch of guys reading and grading web sites, it's more like a bunch of monkeys sniffing food and putting the good bananas at the top. -Triumph

Tyssen
Tyssen's picture
Offline
Moderator
Brisbane
Last seen: 5 years 4 weeks ago
Brisbane
Timezone: GMT+10
Joined: 2004-05-01
Posts: 8201
Points: 1386

Deuce wrote:If you DO go

Deuce wrote:

If you DO go with this method, then use a valid doctype to validate against and then change to the "Skinny" version would be the way I would recommend doing things.

Yeah, I was thinking that as well although you can validate your HTML5 documents with the W3C validator now too.

How to get help
Post a link. If you can't post a link, jsFiddle it.
My blog | My older articles | CSS Reference