Thread: Doc Type

    #1
  1. No Profile Picture
    Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2
    Rep Power
    0

    Doc Type


    I am painfully new to web design; in reading the articles on here, I've come to realize that none of my site's pages contain a "doc type" tag. I'm using a WYSIWYG html editor and didn't realize that "doc type" should be added to my pages.

    So here's my question. Should I insert a transitional, static, or an xml doc type? My site is pretty simple, no animation, etc. I'm afraid that iserting a doc type which wasn't there when I created the pages will screw everything up. And, while I know xml is "better", my site is "in" html, so can I just drop an xml tag anyway?

    Thanks for your help.

    <snip>
    Pointing out the flaws since 2005
    Last edited by Wit; Nov 16th, 2005 at 01:09 PM. Reason: Sorry, no live links in posts. Please read our FAQs
  2. #2
  3. SEO Earthquake!
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    3,307
    Rep Power
    25
    Don't use an xml doctype unless your document is actually xml. Some helpful links:

    http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.asp
    http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_dtd.asp
    http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_validate.asp
    http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/Doctype
    http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html

    I reccomend it as it will allow you to validate your pages and ensure all your viewers are getting the same experience. It does not have any direct relation to SEO.

    It may screw up your layout at first but you will get a better understanding of how things work and that will help you build pages faster in the future.

    And I reccomend XHTML 1.0 Transitional.
    14th Colony: The hardest working websites online!

    Looking for links? Join the Union and don't miss English Grammar rules, tips and explanations
  4. #3
  5. No Profile Picture
    Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2
    Rep Power
    0
    Originally Posted by rmccarley
    Don't use an xml doctype unless your document is actually xml. Some helpful links:

    http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.asp
    http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_dtd.asp
    http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/xhtml_validate.asp
    http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/Doctype
    http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html

    I reccomend it as it will allow you to validate your pages and ensure all your viewers are getting the same experience. It does not have any direct relation to SEO.

    It may screw up your layout at first but you will get a better understanding of how things work and that will help you build pages faster in the future.

    And I reccomend XHTML 1.0 Transitional.
    So I can use XHTML 1.0 even if I've "written" (or, more accurately, WYSIWYG'd) in HTML?
  6. #4
  7. SEO Earthquake!
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    3,307
    Rep Power
    25
    Try the W3Schools tutorial on XHTML. It should answer all your questions.

    But you should use the doctype for the document you wrote. If it's HTML, then use that.
  8. #5
  9. Croatia - Hrvatska
    SEO Chat Skiller (1500 - 1999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Croatia - Hrvatska
    Posts
    1,891
    Rep Power
    19
    I recommend XHTML Strict 1.0
  10. #6
  11. Protecting wit's mice
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Jammerland
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    17
    Why not html4.01 strict?
  12. #7
  13. SEO Earthquake!
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    3,307
    Rep Power
    25
    Why is that? I've personally seen better results for SEO with transitional and I can code it faster as strict requires more CSS useage.
  14. #8
  15. Protecting wit's mice
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Jammerland
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    17
    A strict doctype ensures you a better accessibility (think disabled people/software and or hardware).

    However I think it's probably best to use html4.01 strict and no xhtml since this isn't backwards compatible with html (this will probably be implemented in the first official release of xhtml2.0)

    And xhtml overall is useless since IE will parse it using the SGML parser anyway...
  16. #9
  17. SEO Earthquake!
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    3,307
    Rep Power
    25
    Which browsers out there don't support XHTML?

    Comments on this post

    • Jammer agrees : Internet explorer doesn't support xhtml
  18. #10
  19. Croatia - Hrvatska
    SEO Chat Skiller (1500 - 1999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Croatia - Hrvatska
    Posts
    1,891
    Rep Power
    19
    Why not html4.01 strict?
    Or html 4.01 strict
    I've personally seen better results for SEO with transitional
    I must say again that transitional or strict has nothing to do with ranking
  20. #11
  21. SEO Earthquake!
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    3,307
    Rep Power
    25
    Originally Posted by Bruno
    I must say again that transitional or strict has nothing to do with ranking
    I know that's the official party line, but I have had the *best luck* with xhtml 1.0 transitional when it comes to SEO.

    Can't say why, just that it is.
  22. #12
  23. Croatia - Hrvatska
    SEO Chat Skiller (1500 - 1999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Croatia - Hrvatska
    Posts
    1,891
    Rep Power
    19
    Can't say why, just that it is.
    Becose your code is clear, nothing else. Im sure you will have same ranking without xhtml transitional
  24. #13
  25. SEO Earthquake!
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    3,307
    Rep Power
    25
    Some sure. But my xhtml transitional sites outrank my html transitional and strict sites and the only xhtml strict I did. May be coincidence but...

Similar Threads

  1. Best type of URLs
    By jozomannen in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Jun 27th, 2005, 02:12 PM
  2. Three EU states seen keeping ban on GMO maize type (Reuters)
    By RSS_News_User in forum Science News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Jun 20th, 2005, 10:01 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Apr 27th, 2005, 03:02 PM
  4. New Type of Backlinks
    By anthroa in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jun 1st, 2004, 07:05 AM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo