- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:32:04 -0800
- To: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- Cc: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, David Orchard <orchard@pacificspirit.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, www-tag@w3.org
Michael(tm) Smith wrote: > Regarding the world voting with its feet: As far as the Web goes > at least, it would seem that it's instead really been a matter of > the vast majority of content providers voting against XML/XHTML > completely and voting for HTML instead (by choosing to serve > non-WF HTML, and by choosing to serve XHTML as text/html so that > it gets processed by HTML parsers in browsers instead of by XML > parsers in browsers). > On this point, I have to call B.S. again. That a document is served as text/html does not make it HTML. Much less does it make it not XML. If a document satisfies the BNF grammar and the various well-formedness constraints, it is XML, whatever you call it. It may also be HTML, and perhaps other things as well. The MIME type is not normative. That someone has labeled a document as one thing or another does not make it that thing. If people are serving well-formed XML, it is likely they do so because they find it useful to do so, whatever MIME type happens to be assigned. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 01:32:49 UTC