Comment by valadaptive 1 month ago I always include `<meta charset="utf-8">`. Is that still necessary? 5 comments valadaptive Reply genewitch 1 month ago you don't even need `<!doctype html>`. I'm sure it's easy to look up when that was added/recommended, but i've never used it when i do a 94 html page/site like this. html head title /title /head body /body /html 'sit qznc 1 month ago Minimal valid HTML5: <!doctype html> <title>Hello</title> <h1>Hello World</h1> neilv 1 month ago That particular doctype is HTML5. I was making a too-subtle joke about slapping it on '94 HTML. neilv 1 month ago I also do that and a couple other things. I used mostly '94 HTML for the comment, to try to make a point. kxrm 1 month ago if the server supplies this as a header, it's not necessary.
genewitch 1 month ago you don't even need `<!doctype html>`. I'm sure it's easy to look up when that was added/recommended, but i've never used it when i do a 94 html page/site like this. html head title /title /head body /body /html 'sit qznc 1 month ago Minimal valid HTML5: <!doctype html> <title>Hello</title> <h1>Hello World</h1> neilv 1 month ago That particular doctype is HTML5. I was making a too-subtle joke about slapping it on '94 HTML.
neilv 1 month ago That particular doctype is HTML5. I was making a too-subtle joke about slapping it on '94 HTML.
neilv 1 month ago I also do that and a couple other things. I used mostly '94 HTML for the comment, to try to make a point.
you don't even need `<!doctype html>`. I'm sure it's easy to look up when that was added/recommended, but i've never used it when i do a 94 html page/site like this. html head title /title /head body /body /html 'sit
Minimal valid HTML5:
That particular doctype is HTML5. I was making a too-subtle joke about slapping it on '94 HTML.
I also do that and a couple other things. I used mostly '94 HTML for the comment, to try to make a point.
if the server supplies this as a header, it's not necessary.