Doctype and Encoding in FP2000

  LeadingMNMs 15:54 05 Jan 2005

When I enter the standard XHTML declarations in Frontpage 2000, they are forced into the body section when the file is saved. Anyone know a way to get around this ?

The standard declaration is:

?xml version="1.0" encoding = "UTF-8"?>

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

  Taran 20:30 05 Jan 2005

Well, to beging with you're wasting your time adding that particular DTD to FrontPage 2000 pages since the page code will be anything but XHTML compliant.

There are ways of migrating the XHTML via FrontPage 2000 but they are a bit involved and not terribly efficient.

To begin with FrontPage 2000 generates some quite odd code. There are ways of 'cleaning' that code which strips out the proprietary tags but this can sometimes break your pages. Ususally it doesn't, but it's only fair to warn you that it can.

Now, rather than me typing and waffling on, try looking here to begin with for information on writing accessible code with FrontPage 2000 (including modifying the DTD in your page template).

click here

There is an interesting article at this link click here that contains instructions on how to integrate HTML Tidy into FrontPage. HTML Tidy is a small program that does what its name suggests.

The above should get you up and running, but if you have any questions feel free to ask.

  Taran 20:44 05 Jan 2005

I should have added that if you really want to go with XHTML Strict, you either have to be very, very careful abut which WYSIWYG editor you choose and how you use it, or you have to start rolling your sleeves up and hard coding your pages.

If you want to work with code then FrontPage 2000 is not necessarily your best bet, by quite some margin.

Try the excellent HTML Kit click here if you want to start fooling with code to any serious degree. It has all the relevant DTD templates built in and also features code autocomplete, code validation, code tidy and all kinds of other nice things.

If you don't want to fool with code too much, and before we go much further I'd like to say that I hate to be seen to suggest one WYSIWYG editor over another, but I'd give some serious thought to moving over to either Dreamweaver or Adobe GoLive. Both of them feature direct support for XHTML Strict and are certainly far more appropriate if you plan on working to that standard over the long term.

FrontPage 2003 has good XHTML code support (in code view you right click on the page and select the topion to "Apply XML Formatting Rules") but it is not as good, in my opinion, in terms of many of the built in XHTML coding and tool options that other editors have.

To be honest, XHTML Strict is difficult to stick to at the best of times and all but impossible when using FrontPage 2000. It would probably be less effort to start afresh with another editor than rework every page of a site through a code cleaner, XHTML conversion, code checking, validation and so on.

Just my two penneth

  LeadingMNMs 20:50 05 Jan 2005

I only hard code the pages, I have to for my degree - and they have to be Strict. Normally I use some form of text editor, JPad Pro to be precise, although its trial has expired and I don't really want to pay for it, so I thought that since I had Frontpage sitting there, I would use it to write the code.

Yes, I know there are lots of other text editors out there, but I find them all annoying as opposed to JPad Pro. The main reason for this is its ability to indent the code automatically - yes I'm lazy when it comes to pressing tab.

ThoughI'll have a look at some of your links.

Many thanks

  LeadingMNMs 21:03 05 Jan 2005

I thought changing the template as described at the top of the first link might work, but alas Frontpage ruined that as well. Looks like I'm giving up on it now.

Downloading the HTML kit now, and see if it meets my very high standards.

Thanks again

  Taran 21:28 05 Jan 2005

I think you'll find HTML Kit to be more than capable. It may not satisfy your personal preferences though.

Most people, once they develop a fondness for one particular program, rarely even consider changing until or unless something truly spectacular comes along. For a long time I refused outright to budge from BBEdit on my Apple macs.

I use a combination of TopStyle Pro, HTML Kit and Crimson Editor for almost all of my web work that involves pure codeslinging. For my general daily chores I leverage the power that Dreamweaver MX 2004, FrontPage 2003, Adobe GoLive CS and NetObjects Fusion 8 offer me.

I also regularly play with DzSoft PHP Editor, PHP Expert Editor, JCreator Pro, Zend Studio and Visual Studio Enterprise Architect, among others. Different tools for different jobs really.

  LeadingMNMs 21:39 05 Jan 2005

It seems to be alright. A problem seem to have is not giving editors enough chance to provide that they are able of doing the job. Although compared to WordPad they all do a good job.

Though I might have to consider shelling out the £30 for JPad Pro due to its support for many other document types. Its also convient since this is what I use at university.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Best Black Friday Deals 2017

How modern book design was influenced by illustrated manuscripts

Best Black Friday Apple Deals 2017

Les meilleurs logiciels de montage vidéo gratuits (en 2017)