CSS and XHTML file structure

I tough my self CSS and XHTML and I kind of have a way of putting a site together but I was wondering if anyone has read any articles or anything that explains a good way to structure a XHTML file. Or if anyone has any personal input.

[EDIT]

The main reason I'm asking this is because I'm interested in what the "standards" are. Here is an example of a piece I just did.

I've been reading a lot of books on web standards lately, and your code looks pretty good to me (although what's with the transitional doctype? )

The book I'm reading right now, Web Standards Creativity, has a lot of great info and it's a collection of a bunch of different authors, so you get a good overview of how the experts do it.

Editor put that in there lol

Thanks, I'll have to check that book out.

I'd rather use a transitional than strict DOCTYPE for anything other than FAQ or dictionary type pages that really have no functionality other than simple Q&A.

Wouldn't it be better to start with strict doctype and then change to transitional when and if you need to? For example, I like to design a site with all strict, but if I decide to use an iframe on one of the pages (like for a google map or something), then I'll change that one page to transitional. I really haven't found all that many instances where I need to use transitional, though...

The Strict DTD promotes a separation of structure and presentation, which makes a site so much easier to maintain. Trabnsitional is a bit more chalenging i think sometimes:)

CSS was introduced so that the HTML tags actually represent the type of content and not the formatting, for eg. em for emphasis, address for contact addresses. In that context, I would advise against using definition list tags (like those in the code you posted above) unless you are actually defining some terms, because the layout aspect can anyway be controlled using CSS.

That's exactly why I only use it for those types of pages.

I went through the whole trying to get everything to fit with strict, it just makes my life soo much easier to stay away from strict except with certain extremely basic types of pages where the content is likely to never, or very rarely change.

I tend to do the same joebert ... at first it was the other way around though.

@kc0tma: that book looks sweet ... I gotta get a credit card for stuff like that, because I can't buy anything online ... ever ...

I prefer transitional as it gives more flexibility on content but it's only a small point.
Have you seen the standard CSS grid structures. Google and Yahoo have examples but there are several others. Just search Google.

Why use anything but strict? (preferably of the html flavour)

With a strict doctype you have the browser (hopefully) rendering the page in the most standards-compliant manner that it is capable of. Sounds like a good thing to me. Now, if you are interested in the whole "web standards thing" then stay strict. I'm not a standards-Nazi by any stretch of the imagination (I know that the page as seen in a browser window by its end user is what really matters), but this would seem the logical course of action.

A transitional doctype actually triggers a browser in to doing funny things (quirks mode and almost-standards mode). Wouldn't that pesky box-model problem in IE than keeps appearing at Ozzu over and over again finally vanish if we all used strict doctypes?

The thing I have against STRICT is that I can't use "target='_blank'" which completely sucks, and on most pages I do, I'll have a link at the bottom, pointing towards my website and I would like it to open up in a new window ...

I believe the resolution to that RT is to not use an xhtml doctype (there are many reasons why you shouldn't be using xhtml).

I also think very carefully about new windows, as many people find them quite annoying. If the purpose of the new window is to somehow trap visitors on your pages, then you are opening new windows for the wrong reasons imho. I'd use them for certain situations only - like opening a google map with a ton of placemarks or displaying images over 1 or 2 MB in size.

Ah okay I see the point that you're making there ... If a visitor wanted to open something up in a new tab they could do it themselves ... The only thing is, some users don't even know they could do that (unfortunately) and then they get taken to a whole new page ... but I guess they'll just have to learn the "hard" way ...

This really got me thinking now ...

Also, you can use a really small amount of JavaScript to make links open in a new window when you feel it really is appropriate. Plus, then you have the added benefit of being able to control what the new window looks like (size, menus, etc.)