W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > June 2000

Re: XHTML, content type, and content negotiation

From: Karl Ove Hufthammer <huftis@bigfoot.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 18:31:23 +0200
Message-ID: <039101bfdb9f$2a10f2a0$0d369fc3@huftis>
To: "Dave J Woolley" <DJW@bts.co.uk>, <www-html@w3.org>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave J Woolley" <DJW@bts.co.uk>
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 12:42 PM
Subject: RE: XHTML, content type, and content negotiation


| > From: Karl Ove Hufthammer [SMTP:huftis@bigfoot.com]
| >
| > IMO, the world (wide web) would be a much better place if all
browsers
| > acted
| > this way (from the start of -- it's too late now).
|
| [DJW:]  I don't think that is commercially realistic.
| The quality of browsers is judged by people who do not
| understand the true structure of HTML, so the commercial
| pressure is to appear to work for more broken HTML than
| the competitors.  Rejecting invalid HTML would be seen as
| a bug by many users.

Yes. Of course I don't propose browsers to begin rejecting invalid HTML
(<=4.0). But they should reject XHTML that isn't well-formed, in the
same way they reject all other XML documents that aren't well-formed.
There is no reason to *not* reject unwell-formed XHTML sent as
'text/html'. At least I can't think of any reason. Can anybody else?

-- 
Karl Ove Hufthammer
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2000 12:38:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:43 GMT