- From: Max Froumentin <mf@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 10:18:24 +0100
- To: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Cc: <www-validator@w3.org>
Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com> writes: > On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Max Froumentin wrote: > >> A few examples to play with: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2002/03/27-mathml/valid.mml > > Is application/mathml+xml registered? No it's not. This is why the w3c server should perhaps not send it and use application/xml instead. Personally, I'd rather it being used and recognised by the validator. After all, it is suggested by RFC3023, and if there is going to be a MathML mime type, it'll be that. However I'll remind the WG that maybe we want to register it properly anyway. > That document has no preamble. In the absence of a doctype, none > of the validators will validate it It has no preamble on purpose. If the validator gets mime type information, or a file extension it should be able to infer that the document is MathML. >> http://www.w3.org/2002/03/27-mathml/valid.xml >> http://www.w3.org/2002/03/27-mathml/invalid.xml > > results as expected. Yes, I was merely suggesting that upon reporting success in the case of the first example, it would be nice to have the validator say that it is valid *MathML* and display the valid mathml icon. Max.
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 04:20:08 UTC