W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > October 2002

Re: Media type

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:52:48 +0200
To: Bertilo Wennergren <bertilow@gmx.net>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <3dce8c61.74143813@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Bertilo Wennergren wrote:
>I just tried out the new validator, and it immediately proved to be more
>useful than the old one, since it successfully validated my XHTMl 1.1
>pages served as "application/xhtml+xml":
>
>  <http://www.bertilow.com/?xml>
>
>The old validator refused to touch that stuff.
>
>Congratulations to the team that worked on the new validator!
>
>It would perhaps be a good idea if the validator reported the media type
>of the validated resource. The choice between "text/html",
>"application/xhtml+xml", "application/xml" (and whatever else) for XHTML
>docs, is an important issue that many people are not even aware of.
>
>The new validator should probably also report what character encoding it
>detected (the old one does).

Agreed for both. Maybe it should just echo the complete HTTP response
header, or link to http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/headers?uri=...

As for XHTML media types, the validator should try to complain if the
recommendations of http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/ are not met,
e.g. complain if an XHTML 1.1 document is published as text/html. There
is already a great test case available:

  http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml11-20010531/

:-)
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 07:52:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:04 GMT