- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:48:08 +0100
- To: www-validator@w3.org
On 20 Apr 2008, at 21:15, Etienne Miret wrote: > David Dorward wrote : >> If you are doing content negotiation and then sending exactly the >> same content, but with different Content-Types, then the validator >> is going to get the same data either way - so it makes no difference > Actually it makes a difference. If the page is XHTML, the validator > will issue a warning when it is sent as text/html. Only if you are serving a version of XHTML marked as "SHOULD NOT be served as text/html" - which you shouldn't be doing. The validator doesn't give such a warning for XHTML 1.0. http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fxhtml1%2F >> (and the content negotiation is pretty pointless). > Not really, Web browser will usually handle a document differently > depending of its media-type. Typically, a text/html document will be > processed by an SGML parser, No, typically it will be processed by a tag soup parser. > whereas an application/xhtml+xml document will be processed by an > XML parser. So what? The net result is just that you get a few minor inconsistencies in how the DOM appears (e.g. tbody elements are optional rather then implied in XHTML), lose incremental rendering in some browsers (Firefox 2 for instance), lose support for document.write, lose the magic handling of the body elements as regards CSS in some browsers, and have to write your JS in such a way that it can switch between regular and namespace aware DOM methods. There is no point in serving up exactly the same document with different content-types. Content negotiation would be useful if, for instance, you had an XHTML +MathML document and an HTML document with the MathML converted to images or text, and you switched between the two, but for just the content-type? Waste of time and effort. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
Received on Sunday, 20 April 2008 20:48:50 UTC