RE: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?)

Hi David,

<david>
What good reason is there for serving XHTML 1.1 as text/html? What
advantages does it give you over Appendix C conformant XHTML 1.0
served as text/html?
</david>

Thanks for your comment. The answer is none. I was simply correcting a
misinterpretation of the mime type requirements of XHTML 1.1

Best Regards,

Neil Whiteley
Tag2

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of David Dorward
Sent: 22 June 2005 23:45
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?)


On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 10:18:57PM +0100, Neil Whiteley wrote:

> A lot depends on your interpretation of the document you refer to and
> specifically the meaning of *SHOULD NOT* used in the summaries table.

What good reason is there for serving XHTML 1.1 as text/html? What
advantages does it give you over Appendix C conformant XHTML 1.0
served as text/html?

-- 
David Dorward                                      http://dorward.me.uk