quirks mode and IE5 vs IE6

Well, it's probably past time for me to regularly include doctype in my
html.

What is quirks mode and how do I avoid it. I seem to recall a specific url
is required.

What is the suggested doctype for html4.0 transitional? That's probably what
I'm writing.

Also, what's the differences between IE5(windows) and IE6?

I don't have IE6, but usually what I write looks very similar in IE5, Opera7
and NS7.1. Sometimes IE5 mac looks a bit different although Safari is good.
What do I need to worry about in IE6?

Cheers,
Jeff

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 05:35:31 GMT, Jeff Thies <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) net> wrote:

What is the suggested doctype for html4.0 transitional? That's probably
what
I'm writing.

See http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/...l#version-info

Jeff Thies wrote:

Well, it's probably past time for me to regularly include doctype in my
html.

Umm... very much so.

What is quirks mode and how do I avoid it. I seem to recall a specific url
is required.

Quirks mode is when a browser emulates the stupid mistakes of its
predecessors so code written to love their errors doesn't fall apart.

http://gutfeldt.ch/matthias/articles/doctypeswitch.html

What is the suggested doctype for html4.0 transitional? That's probably
what I'm writing.

HTML 4.01 Transitional isn't suggested, for modern webpages HTML 4.01 Strict
is the most apropriate.

http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html

Also, what's the differences between IE5(windows) and IE6?

IE6 has fewer bugs and fewer massive secuity holes.


--
David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>

"David Dorward" <dorward (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> skrev i meddelandet
news:c0fbnj$pae$2$830fa795 (AT) news (DOT) demon.co.uk...

Jeff Thies wrote:
Also, what's the differences between IE5(windows) and IE6?

IE6 has fewer bugs and fewer massive secuity holes.

One great benefit is that you can disable receving HTML-formated mails
and news postings from those who still send that.
The body contain only the text.

--
/Arne

Jeff Thies wrote:

What is quirks mode and how do I avoid it. I seem to recall a specific url
is required.

Also, what's the differences between IE5(windows) and IE6?

See

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...hancements.asp
for details on IE6 and its two different rendering modes
--

Martin Honnen
http://JavaScript.FAQTs.com/

Jeff Thies wrote:

Well, it's probably past time for me to regularly include doctype in my
html.

What is quirks mode and how do I avoid it. I seem to recall a specific url
is required.

What is the suggested doctype for html4.0 transitional? That's probably what
I'm writing.

Also, what's the differences between IE5(windows) and IE6?

MSIE 5.x for windows does not implement any kind of differentiated
rendering mode. The good news is that with time people do upgrade their
browser. MSIE 6 for windows beta 1 was released in march 2001 IIRC.

I don't have IE6, but usually what I write looks very similar in IE5, Opera7
and NS7.1. Sometimes IE5 mac looks a bit different although Safari is good.
What do I need to worry about in IE6?

Cheers,
Jeff

I recommend you always use a strict definition because in all browsers
supporting standards compliant rendering mode, a doctype declaration
with the strict definition always trigger standards compliant rendering
mode.

DOCTYPEs that will trigger standards compliant behavior in Opera 7, IE6
for Windows, and Netscape 7:
http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/doctype/

There are other related benefits to using a strict definition.
The most important benefits you get when triggering standards compliant
rendering mode in MSIE 6 for windows are
- correct implementation of the CSS1 box model: MSIE 6 in backward
compatible rendering mode still incorrectly implements the CSS1 box model
- faster parsing and faster rendering of pages (assuming your markup is
error-free: best is to use the W3C validator)
- rendering is closer, more consistent to what other W3C web standards
compliant browsers render and this should stay that way or get further
improved with time as browser manufacturers are aiming to support web
standards and they work on eradicating browser bugs

DU

<snip>

May I ask you why don't you use IE6? When I have to use IE5 in some
client's office, I suffer a lot. It renders incorrectly lots of pages
and I can't stand that...

Gee, could that be it?

I can't author something that may be badly broken in a mainstream browser,
even if it is that browsers fault.

I can't understand why people doesn't use IE6
if it's safer, faster, more compatible with standards...

By the same token, why use IE at all? If I'm browsing for my own purposes, I
don't use IE.

So, please, can you tell me why are you still using IE5?

Because my clients would go balistic if 18% of their audience had serious
problems with their site and I wasn't even aware of it! It's really the
difference between authoring for yourself, and authoring for a living. If
site appearance is important, and it is for my clients, this goes triple.

I'm just glad I don't have to support NS4 anymore!

Cheers,
Jeff

Or, if anyone has reasons, I'd greatly appreciate if you share them with
me.

Cheers,
Andrés

Jeff Thies wrote:

So, please, can you tell me why are you still using IE5?

Because my clients would go balistic if 18% of their audience had serious
problems with their site and I wasn't even aware of it!

That is a good reason to test pages in IE5.

It leaves two questions. Why do you not test your pages in Internet Explorer
6? Why do you not use IE6 for normal use (or better yet, a decent browser
like FireFox)?

--
David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>

"Jeff Thies" <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) net> wrote in
news:7DnXb.4391$W74.669 (AT) newsread1 (DOT) news.atl.earthlink.net:

So, please, can you tell me why are you still using IE5?

Because my clients would go balistic if 18% of their audience had
serious problems with their site and I wasn't even aware of it! It's
really the difference between authoring for yourself, and authoring
for a living. If site appearance is important, and it is for my
clients, this goes triple.

And it's important to remember that many viewers may be using IE5 because
it's what's installed on the machine that they're using and because the
machine isn't their *personal* machine, they *can't* upgrade the browser.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, Eric Bohlman wrote:

And it's important to remember that many viewers may be using IE5 because
it's what's installed on the machine that they're using and because the
machine isn't their *personal* machine, they *can't* upgrade the browser.

Sure. But conversely, it may be important to remember that there will
be viewers using IE6 because _that's_ what's installed on their
machine. So designing a page "to" the bugs of IE5 (which might have
been corrected in later versions, but if the author doesn't have one
then he won't necessarily know that) is not the answer, either.

Unfortunately, it's a lot of fuss to maintain more than one version of
Win IE. In fact, due to security concerns we get into trouble if we
run old versions of IE on our network: updating to the latest MS
fixes isn't an option - it's a requirement, in this context.