New DOCTYPE needed

  • 4
  • Idea
  • Updated 8 years ago
  • Under Consideration
I'm trying to add a HTML 5 feature (localStorage) but this is not possible with the strict DOCTYPE:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "">

I recommend using the transitional one which will allow me to use this feature on my website:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "">

This will allow more HTML 5 features.
I hope you consider this or at least tell me why the yola company has decided to use the STRICT DOCTYPE.
Photo of Shawn Holman

Shawn Holman

  • 486 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
  • unsure

Posted 9 years ago

  • 4
Photo of the_pete


  • 65 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Official Response
Hey Shawn

You might be right, we should have chosen to use transitional from the start. The problem we have now is that if you change the doctype from strict to transitional, there are some rendering differences that will result. This would mean that some users would see changes on their sites they weren't expecting (in certain browsers).

There is detailed information about which browsers see a difference between strict and transitional here:

It might turn out that changing it would have little effect in practice, however proving that would be considerably costly for us as it would need us to test against a large sample of our user's sites.

An easier fix for us (in terms of time spent) would be for us to introduce an advanced option that let you choose your doctype. We could consider this if enough people asked for the feature, or if enough widgets people wanted to use needed specific doctypes.

Thanks for pointing this issue out.