DOCTYPE declarations

evocreative · #1 (**permalink**) 07-01-2004, 05:20 AM

I know they are important, but that's as far as my knowlegde about them go. Does anybody know how they're supposed to be used and how the misuse of them affects your website and the way is viewed by search engines?

A website I'm currently developing ( http://www.praguestagandhen.com ) doesn't have ANY DOCTYPE declaration. It seems as it was removed by Dreamweaver. Is that possible? Or could it be because of my own sloppiness with the code?

I inserted one (shown at the bottom of this posting) and validated the page with a markup validation service and it said that the page was not valid html 4.1 transitional.

Any comments, suggestions?

I inserted this:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

paulhiles · #2 (**permalink**) 07-01-2004, 08:46 AM

I generally would recommend using a doctype wherever possible, and validating your code as you build your pages. Sometimes it's not always possible to be a 100% compliant, but I firmly believe your site will ultimately benefit.

Remember a doctype is basically your way of announcing or declaring the type of document you have made, and that document should conform to the standards set out in its declaration. If you don't specify a doctype, browsers are free to interpret your documents as they feel free (often known as "quirks mode"). Wouldn't you like to be in control of how your pages appear? :o)

With regards to the SE benefits, I don't think that a text-based crawler really cares about a doctype declaration; as search engine technology becomes more sophisticated it may become an issue, but this is pure speculation on my part! ;o)

If you fancy doing some reading... there are three pages of excellent discussion on this very topic here: Absolutely No Need For Document Type Definitions

Hope that helps,

Paul

evocreative · #3 (**permalink**) 07-01-2004, 08:52 AM

Thank you. That was very helpful. According to that article, most of the big websites don't seem to be using them anymore. Maybe they'll be extinct evenutally.

matauri · #4 (**permalink**) 07-01-2004, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evocreative

I inserted one (shown at the bottom of this posting) and validated the page with a markup validation service and it said that the page was not valid html 4.1 transitional.

When you check for validation check the box that says "Show Source". Then read down the list at your errors, and compare them line by line to the source code at the bottom of the page.

Don't be disheartened though, like many are. It may say it has 100 errors, but 80 of them might be generated by one error further up the page. So start at top of error list, and work your way down. With W3C's new layout, they have made it easier than before to recognise & correct errors.

And I am a firm believer in doctypes.

matauri · #5 (**permalink**) 07-01-2004, 09:11 AM

I wouldnt be too fast to follow the big boys. An example of how well their sites are coded:

Microsoft

Macromedia

The big boys are the worst coders around. They came to rely on their programs instead of their skills.

So dont use them as an example :-)