W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > February 2007

Re: FW: Agenda: HTML media type

From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:01:20 -0500
To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Cc: public-xml-core-wg <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070216230120.GE31468@mercury.ccil.org>

Grosso, Paul scripsit:

> The HTML WG proposes to change things by allowing XHTML 1.1 to be
> served as text/html.

I very much support this, and I don't think the disadvantages are really
disadvantageous.

> * previously, one could guarantee that XHTML
> would be processed as XML, have an XML DOM, reliable and
> browser-independent parsing, etc.

I don't think there was any such guarantee anyhow.  But if you want
your XHTML documents treated as XML, serve them as such; if you
want them treated as HTML, serve them as such.

The whole idea of forbidding a particular document type to be
served with a particular Content-Type: header is silly, anyway.
You can serve HTML or XHTML as text/plain if you want to, and
a conformant client will duly display it as such.

> * people might start serving content which was XHTML as text/html,
> thus (as the document changes over time) no longer being informed by
> browsers of such minor flaws as WF errors.

Sharp tools cut.

> * tools that extract and process content (aggregators, etc) may not
> process such content as it is not labelled as being XML.

Everything's a tradeoff.

-- 
John Cowan    cowan@ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
The whole of Gaul is quartered into three halves.
        -- Julius Caesar
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 23:01:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:35 GMT