W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2008

Re: please add Accept header to http request containing application/xhtml+xml

From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:54:42 +0100
Message-Id: <B356E487-9233-4501-9E62-92CE8A5D3FF5@dorward.me.uk>
To: www-validator@w3.org

On 21 Apr 2008, at 18:02, Dean Edridge wrote:
>
> Put it this way; If I had to write a tutorial on how to use XHTML, I  
> would not want to have to include a line that says: "...but wait,  
> there's more, you'll have to add this extra line of code so people  
> can validate your XHTML pages on the W3C Validator."

What extra line of code is that? As mentioned previously, the  
validator will happily validate, in XML mode, XHTML documents. If they  
have a known XHTML Doctype then it will do so when they are served as  
text/html. If the spec says "MAY be served as text/html" then it won't  
even give a warning.

> I think people are reading too much into this, it's just an Accept  
> header, it's not a hack. Other high quality validators have an  
> Accept header [1]. I don't know why the idea sounds so novel/evil/ 
> unreasonable etc...


It is an opportunity to introduce bugs and any change in behaviour  
could cause problems by people who have developed with the current  
behaviour in mind[1]. That's two reasons against, now what are the  
reasons in favour? I don't think anyone has provided a use case where  
it would provide a benefit (it is a long thread though, so I might  
have missed one, please point it out if that is the case).

The reasons against might be minute, but the reasons for appear to be  
non-existent.

[1] This type of thing shouldn't happen, but sometimes does anyway.

-- 
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
Received on Monday, 21 April 2008 18:55:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:29 GMT