On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:42:33AM +0000, Ian Hickson wrote: | But it's one of the many things people get wrong, and one of the many | things that will screw up when people change their text/html XHTML files | to use a real XML MIME type. Ian, all your arguments in this thread so far seem to revolve around the fact that user agents will treat an xhtml file served as text/html differently from an xhtml file served as text/xml (or application/xml or application/xhtml+xml). If a browser were to choose which rendering path to use (xml or tag soup) depending on, say, the doctype (a far more reliable method, as most OSes do not support mime types properly for local files) then there would be no problem. While the current two major XHTML browsers (Gecko and Opera) do seem to rely solely on mime type, I would not be surprised if Microsoft, when IE finally does support XHTML, combined MIME types with some kind of doctype sniffing code -- they are hardly well-known for rigidly obeying mime types. -- Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS E-mail: tobyink@goddamn.co.uk PGP: http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=12 Web Page: http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ IM: AIM:inka80 ICQ:6622880 YIM:tobyink Jabber:tobyink@a-message.de Like I always say -- nothing can beat the BRATWURST here in DUSSELDORF!!
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2003 16:23:41 UTC