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.

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-CORE-TECHS/#access-reviewed

>    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:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ 
dnie60/html/cssenhancements.asp

The same is true of Mozilla (standards mode for XHTML 1.0 Strict,  
"almost standards" mode for Transitional):
http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/quirks/doctypes.html

And Opera 7.1 (and 7.0 to 7.03 if you leave out the XML declaration):
http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/doctype/

>   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.

-
m
Received on Friday, 27 June 2003 11:34:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:10 GMT