W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 1999


From: Daniel Hiester <alatus@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 22:16:20 -0800
Message-ID: <001b01bf3bc3$c05f5d40$20e0b3d1@inanis>
To: <www-html@w3.org>
--The file extension has absolutely no meaning in how a browser renders a
page. Those settings are specified with MIME types on the server.--

MSIE does it by file extension, I believe...
I don't want to suggest that MSIE is this or that kind of browser, or that
it dominates the browser market, but there is still a fact that it's a
pretty substancial part of the web. Besides, I doubt that XML would "stand
in" for HTML in the future... it would likely be XHTML, right? That's where
the future development is going to be, isn't it?

I do find it interesting that there is a debate going on over the
On the one hand, I'd hope that .xml would do the trick, but if third party
application vendors do what they've been doing for years, XHTML would not be
rendered as true XML, but as, well, "whatever works best, while allowing the
most careless errors."
(sorry, I know that's a bit off-topic)

Received on Wednesday, 1 December 1999 01:15:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:52 UTC