W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: let authors choose text/html or application/xhtml+xml (detailed review of section 1. Introduction)

From: Kornel Lesinski <kornel@geekhood.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:53:44 +0100
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.txwcnuhrptj49s@aimac.local>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 23:12:03 +0100, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:

> XHTML documents served as text/html result in interoperable behavior
> in typical cases, so that constraint is too strong. Please change
> it to "SHOULD be sent..." and "SHOULD NOT be served...".

Since none of the XHTML-specific featuers can be used in text/html mode,  
and HTML 5 allows some XML-like constructs, I suggest change in naming to  
end confusion between HTML, XHTML-as-XML and XHTML-as-text/html.

If HTML 5 document is served as text/html, it's called HTML 5.
If HTML 5 document is served as XML, it's called XHTML 5.

Therefore "MUST" requirement could be kept for XHTML 5, because _by  
definition_ XHTML 5 in non-XML mode wouldn't exist. Interoperability  
wouldn't be harmed at all, because the interoperable subset of XHTML 5  
documents could be sent as text/html, they just wouldn't be called XHTML  
5, but HTML 5.

-- 
regards, Kornel Lesinski
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2007 23:54:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:48 UTC