W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Cleaning House

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 12:24:31 -0700
Message-Id: <59E0EA3D-1F89-4E64-9652-F9A65DABEBF6@apple.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>

On May 3, 2007, at 12:17 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:

> Chris Wilson wrote:
>> Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>>> Also, as was already hinted at in this thread, it's unlikely that
>>> mainstream browsers will actually implement the draconian  
>>> parsing...and
>>> that's fine by me, I wouldn't insist on something like the
>>> "non-well-formed XHTML sent as application/xhtml+xml" error  
>>> handling.
>> Not sure what you mean.  I would insist, if the XHTML were  
>> identified with an XML mime type, that it require XML well- 
>> formedness.  If I had wanted to "support XHTML" by just piping  
>> "application/xml+xhtml" content through our tag-soup parser, I  
>> would have done that in IE7.  :)
> Yes, please!!!  Absolutely have IE refuse to process the page if a  
> document that claims to be XHTML (anything) is not well formed.  
> Please Please Please.  Stop the madness!

All browser implementations that I know of already do this for non- 
well-formed XHTML, as identified by the MIME type. IE will  
additionally refuse to process documents that claim to be XHTML and  
are well-formed. However, it is the case that many mobile browsers  
process XHTML as tag soup, due to a lot of mobile walled-garden  
content being marked as XHTML Basic when it is not well-formed XML.

Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 19:24:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:20 UTC