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

Re: HTML Validator HTTP Accept

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 07:46:43 -0500
Cc: www-validator Community <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-Id: <580B0EA7-2363-477F-B86B-94427D827AB1@w3.org>
To: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>

Hello,

We've had a lot of discussions, and I don't think we're getting much  
in terms of new points and ideas.

We have two clear camps, one that says “Accept is not needed by the  
HTTP standard, plus you have the accept parameter if you really need  
to trigger format negotiation”, another that says “we really need an  
Accept: header”.

My opinion is rather towards the former, with a twist because I don't  
think that there is an appropriate way to declare all that the  
validator accepts, without having a construct like */xml, application/* 
+xml.

Still, let's try and get out of that arguing loop and into problem  
solving. Sierk, since you've been for the longest time the proponent  
of adding an Accept: header, can you take charge of finding, if not a  
perfect candidate, at  least a very, very good candidate?

The candidate accept header should:
* have text/html and application/xhtml+xml as q=1
* list accept for all other types supported by the validator (SVG,  
MATHML, SMIL, MusicXML, plain XML, etc)
* list accept for all types supported by the other validators  (CSS,  
Feed, RDF)
* finish with an *, with a low q factor
* perhaps also add a few obvious "not supported" with q=0, such as  
raster images?

If you accept (pun not intended), please reopen http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18 
  and reassign it to you.

Thank you.
-- 
olivier
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2008 12:46:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:33 GMT