- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 12:24:31 -0700
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Cc: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On May 3, 2007, at 12:17 PM, Shane McCarron wrote: > > > > Chris Wilson wrote: >> Patrick H. Lauke wrote: >> >>> Also, as was already hinted at in this thread, it's unlikely that >>> mainstream browsers will actually implement the draconian >>> parsing...and >>> that's fine by me, I wouldn't insist on something like the >>> "non-well-formed XHTML sent as application/xhtml+xml" error >>> handling. >>> >> >> Not sure what you mean. I would insist, if the XHTML were >> identified with an XML mime type, that it require XML well- >> formedness. If I had wanted to "support XHTML" by just piping >> "application/xml+xhtml" content through our tag-soup parser, I >> would have done that in IE7. :) >> > Yes, please!!! Absolutely have IE refuse to process the page if a > document that claims to be XHTML (anything) is not well formed. > Please Please Please. Stop the madness! All browser implementations that I know of already do this for non- well-formed XHTML, as identified by the MIME type. IE will additionally refuse to process documents that claim to be XHTML and are well-formed. However, it is the case that many mobile browsers process XHTML as tag soup, due to a lot of mobile walled-garden content being marked as XHTML Basic when it is not well-formed XML. Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 19:24:35 UTC