W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > July 2001

Re: XHTML 1.0 errata

From: Terje Bless <link@tss.no>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 07:17:38 +0200
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
cc: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>, www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010719072045-r01010700-0b6da91a-0910-010c@192.168.1.6>
On 17.07.01 at 21:49, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:

>Will it include a reference to the current I-D for the
>application/xhtml+xml registration? I consider this rather important for
>an early adoption of this media type.

"Hello, Emperor? You have no clothes!" :-)

Quoth
<URL:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-baker-xhtml-media-reg-01.txt>:

   As of February 2001, the HTML WG has taken no official position on
   what MIME media type should be used to describe XHTML 1.0 or any
   other XHTML based language, except in the case where XHTML 1.0
   documents satisfy certain additional requirements (see [XHTML1]
   section 5.1) and can be described with "text/html" (see [TEXTHTML]).

   This document only registers a new MIME media type,
   'application/xhtml+xml'.  It does not define anything more than is
   required to perform this registration.  The HTML WG expects to
   publish further documentation on this subject, including but not
   limited to, information about rules for which documents should and
   should not be described with this new media type, and further
   information about recognizing XHTML documents.


You seem to imply that this media type has associated semantics that the
draft does not supply; it actually explicitly denies such exist. Am I
missing some big, huge, glaringly obvious thing here? If so, *please* set
me straight ASAP! :-)
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2001 01:20:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:49 GMT