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: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:16:19 -0500
Message-ID: <462F70C3.4080802@aptest.com>
To: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
CC: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>, "www-validator@w3.org Community" <www-validator@w3.org>

olivier Thereaux wrote:
> The other is the question of (conditionally) serving XHTML 1.1 as 
> text/html. The spec says SHOULD NOT. I say "well, if the spec says 
> SHOULD NOT, then you should not" and I add that I don't see a good 
> reason to do it. The validator issues a warning when you do. That's 
> the proper behaviour for a SHOULD NOT.
> So... where exactly is the problem?
> If you want to do something a spec says you SHOULD NOT do, because you 
> think there's a good enough reason, it's your choice. But don't come 
> complaining if a conformance checker catches you doing it, and issues 
> a warning about it.
Actually, I beg to differ.  Neither the previous Recommendation of XHTML 
1.1 [1] nor the current Editors Draft of XHTML 1.1 [2] says you SHOULD 
NOT send XHTML 1.1 as text/html.  If you are referring to the 
informative note that was written by Masayasu [3] some years ago...  
that's not normative.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml11-20010531
[2] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts/xhtml11
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 15:16:50 GMT

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