W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2007

Re: [ANN] Beta test of the W3C Markup Validator (0.8.0 beta 1)

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 20:01:28 +0900
Message-Id: <9A6DB128-3FFB-4624-992E-76A89E5962A0@w3.org>
Cc: "www-validator@w3.org Community" <www-validator@w3.org>
To: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>

Hi Sierk,

On Apr 24, 2007, at 19:33 , Sierk Bornemann wrote:
> I want to use XHTML 1.1, and I want to serve the apropriate MIME  
> type to all browsers, which do suffice these standards requirements  
> and who support this MIME type.

Yes, I know the technique, but really, there is no point in using  
XHTML 1.1 if you're going to conditionally serve as text/html. Why  
not just use XHTML 1.0 and follow HTML compatibility guidelines?
>
> My question is: why doesn't the validator catch that MIME type,  
> that is served as "text/html" but re-written to "application/xhtml 
> +xml"? I must assume, that the current validator 0.8 beta doesn't  
> send an Accept-Header, so that the Rewrite-Rule has no chance to work.

Right. This is under discussion here:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=785

> If I am right, why doesn't validator 0.8 beta send an Accept- 
> Header, and would'nt it be better to do so?

I am among those who think it should. Others disagreed. That's why  
there is a discussion over on the bugzilla. I encourage you to  
participate if you have new arguments for that debate.

-- 
olivier
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 11:01:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:24 GMT