Re: XHTML Syntax Served as text/html (Was: Decentralized poetry markup (language))

Leif Halvard Silli writes:

> Tab Atkins Jr., Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:36:42 -0600:
> 
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Leif Halvard Silli
> > <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> > 
> > > So, with HTML5 we get two kinds of text/HTML: "real" text/HTML and
> > > XHTML text/HTML. The latter gives us much more freedom than HTML5.
> > 
> > The latter does not exist.  If a file is served with the text/html
> > mimetype, it is an HTML document, and is processed according to HTML
> > rules.  If it is served with one of the xml mimetypes, it is an XML
> > document, and is processed according to XML rules.  That is all.
> > There is no longer any such thing as "XHTML served as text/html".
> 
> The W3 validator allows me to validate a XHTML document served as
> text/HTML.

The validator isn't the canonical source of what is permitted; where the
validator and a spec differ at least one of them is buggy.

> However, unless the W3C Validator is changed to behave the same 
> draconian way, then there is no problem what so ever in serving XHTML 
> as text/HTML. That UAs then will treat is as text/HTML is of course 
> clear - and also the intent.

When content is being served in a way which will cause all conforming
user-agents to treat it as one thing, how is it useful to check its
validation as something else?

If I'm sending somebody a PostScript document, knowing that she will
attempt to print it, checking whether the file happens to be valid Perl
syntax is completely irrelevant.

Regardless, a change in W3C Validator behaviour cannot affect what is
permitted in HTML5.

Smylers

Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2010 16:02:25 UTC