W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: XHTML/XML some constructive comments required.

From: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 08:34:38 -0700
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
To: tina@greytower.net
Message-Id: <DCADB9FB-A8B4-11D7-A257-000393B628BC@w3.org>

On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 05:30  AM, tina@greytower.net wrote:
>   Fair enough. Let's list a few alternatives with their content type,
>   the effect on WCAG, the result in browsers, and consequences for
>   standards compliance:
>   Markup      Content                 WAI (11.1)  UA     Standard
>    XHTML 1.0   text/html               Not ok      Yes    Yes
>    XHTML 1.0   application/xhtml+xml   Not ok      No     Yes

Where do you get that XHTML fails 11.1? It is explicitly mentioned in  
the core techniques.


>    Basically browsers will take the XML
>    syntax and throw it out as "HTML tagsoup errors", and try to fix it.

Which browsers do this? IE6 handles valid doctypes in standards mode:

The same is true of Mozilla (standards mode for XHTML 1.0 Strict,  
"almost standards" mode for Transitional):

And Opera 7.1 (and 7.0 to 7.03 if you leave out the XML declaration):

>   My interpretation: in the context of accessibility (ie. 11.1 in this
>   case), saying "Use XHTML" means "Use XHTML 1.1 with the correct
>   content-type".

11.1 reads "Use W3C technologies when they are available and  
appropriate for a task and use the latest versions when supported." You  
seem to be saying that XHTML is not widely supported, but then bring up  
11.1 as if it is.

Received on Friday, 27 June 2003 11:34:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:08:52 UTC