W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > October 2003

Re: Call for contributions: new and improved "Web site quality" articles

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:19:18 -0000
Message-ID: <00ca01c388f8$8c68a100$428f9bd9@Snork>
To: <public-evangelist@w3.org>

"Brian Kelly" <B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
>    Hmm.  Have just read section 3.1 in
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/
> which does not seem to *ban* this MIME type although it's clearly not
> recommended:

XHTML is only "allowed" to be served as text/html if it's under Appendix C,
if someone would like to correct me on that and say Appendix C isn't
normative and any old XHTML can be served as text/html then I'll withdraw
the criticism.

>    The document is XHTML 1.0 compliant (append ,validate to the URL)

but it's not Appendix C compliant which AIUI is required to be served as
text/html (C.7 for example, I didn't bother looking beyond.)  Also  xhtml
1.0 SHOULD be served as application/xhtml+xml, and I find it hard to explain
to people that some SHOULD's are to be ignored, and others are to be obeyed,
how is a non-expert supposed to judge which, surely we need to either have
all or none?

Received on Thursday, 2 October 2003 11:24:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:18 UTC