W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 2002

Re: Is this legal XHTML 1.1?

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 05:12:44 +0000 (GMT)
To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Cc: "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0212090501040.8778-100000@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> At 3:43 AM +0000 12/9/02, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> In any case, it is illegal to send XHTML 1.1 as text/html, so the whole
>> excercise is pointless as no legacy browser would be able to render the
>> page in the first place.
> 
> Where exactly does it say that?

It says it in the same place where it says that it is illegal to send
XHTML1.1 as image/png.


> I didn't notice anything in the XHTML 1.1 specs about the proper MIME
> media type, and this was not a listed change from 1.0, which does
> explicitly allow text/html, but I could easily have missed something.

The changes section is non-normative.


Also, text/html's RFC [1] only says "In addition, [XHTML1] defines a
profile of use of XHTML which is compatible with HTML 4.01 and which may
also be labeled as text/html", which references to a profile of XHTML 1.0,
not 1.1, which, in addition, bans internal subsets [2].

[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/ section 3.1.1 items 1 and 5.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                      )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
"meow"                                          /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/                         `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 00:12:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:53 GMT