Strict Document Type Declaration suits my way of thinking. I’ve been told I look for problems before they exist and that I should wait until I have them first [before thinking more thoroughly about what I'm doing]. ( ← The bracketed words are how I rephrase their message to me.)
Imagine if the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) thought the same way like most people do. Most people don’t know, and don’t care to know, what kind of mess it would lead to if the W3C didn’t start depreciating certain attributes in the markups of code. How code is marked up directly affects each element of every page headed for a site online. Those who only browse the internet are only concerned with what they see, but what they will see over the long term is affected by what they don’t see.
Most people also aren’t interested in thinking about what effects inconsistencies between browsers can cause. They just use them and only care about being able to see what they want to look at. That’s fine and not much different from not caring about knowing all the details behind what makes an automobile able to get you from one place to another, or knowing everything about how your body functions to keep you alive. Mechanics are for car care. Doctors of for body care. The illionaires of the W3C¹ (World Wide Web Consortium) are for web care.
If you observe what types of people comprise the membership of the W3C, you’ll notice a common denominator. They’re highly intelligent, strongly motivated to work hard all the time, and are not quitters. If this were not true, they wouldn’t be part of the elite group of members who get to set the standards for how the world wide web operates.
To get ahead and stay successful usually requires self-discipline. It takes self-discipline to learn how to write code that will pass the standards of validation set by the W3C for Strict DOCTYPEs.
When the W3C phases out support for style sheets as they mature, those who remain complacent with their Transitional DOCTYPEs are going to reap the consequences (assuming, of course, the work they did wasn’t for someone else to have to live with).
Immediate gratification is immature thinking. Maturity is full development. Everything in life is meant to develop fully. To stay stagnant at a level of growth before reaching maturity prevents the fruits of labor from forming. We have stages in life meant for transition and learning. It’s a grace period for our mistakes.
For example, if we eat too much, we notice we gain weight. If we don’t learn from our mistakes and correct our ways, we end up becoming progressively more overweight. If we spend faster than we earn, we accumulate debt. Houses quickly constructed aren’t likely to last like the ones built slower with meticulous care.
Transitional DOCTYPEs are the grace period for web publishing. They’re training wheels for riding the big boy’s bike, but someday those training wheels won’t be able to adequately support the weight demanded by the latest versions of browsing software.
I hope that others who may be discouraged by the pain involved in going from the use of Transitional to Strict DOCTYPEs get encouraged by reminding themselves why standards came to be the way they are. It’s for everyone’s benefit in the long run. The upkeep of sites will be a lot easier; much like a structurally sound house requires less maintenance work.
Strenuous physical exercise usually doesn’t bring pleasurable results until afterward. Intellectual workouts aren’t any different. The more that are successfully tackled, the more gratifying they become. Figuring out ways to make your CSS files accomplish the most they can for you is like having dedicated and faithful servants to do your chores without them requiring anything in return. All that is requested is to be clearly told what to do, how to do it, and what the priorities are.
I am far from having mastered everything there is to know about Strict DTD, but to even begin wanting to get acquainted with it requires appreciation first. After all, how many people want to get to know someone who doesn’t seem worth knowing?
¹I say illionaires since those with their caliber of wealth will only get progressively richer as the rest of us get poorer. The billionaires of today were yesterday’s millionaires and will be the future’s trillionaires.
