W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > January 2005

Peculiar validation results for certain XHTML 1.1 documents

From: T.B. van der Molen <tbm@home.nl>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 15:52:12 +0100
To: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <20050106145212.GA17677@tbm.yi.org>

Hello,

I am a little confused by the results from the markup validator when
using <li /> in XHTML 1.1 documents. This and what followed from it
brought up some questions.

0. Is <li /> correct XHTML 1.1 (and correct XHTML 1.0 Strict)? I wasn't
able to find out anywhere on the web.

1. When uploading an XHTML 1.1 document with the text/html content-type
and the the <li /> tag, the validator says:

	Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with
	an SGML parser.

Shouldn't that be an XML parser?

2. On <http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#mime11> I read that using
the text/html content-type is invalid for XHTML 1.1 documents and that
something like application/xhtml+xml should be used instead. But when
uploading an XHTML 1.1 document with this content-type and the <li />
tag, the validator asserts that the document has the text/html
content-type and again says to have parsed the document with an SGML
parser.

3. On <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/conformance.html#strict> an example
XHTML 1.1 document is given that has no content-type meta tag at all.
When uploading an XHTML 1.1 document without such a meta tag, the
validator says:

	No Character Encoding Found! Falling back to UTF-8.

Is the example on the given page incorrect by omitting the meta tag or
does it simply assume that an HTTP server will be specifying the
content-type?

If desired, I can mail or otherwise publish the documents I uploaded to
the validator.

Thanks for your time.

Regards,
Tim van der Molen

-- 
Blessed is a world that is built upon a binary foundation.
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2005 17:36:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:18 GMT