W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2010

Re: ISSUE-4 - versioning/DOCTYPEs

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 07:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: public-html@w3.org, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Message-ID: <1322001243.202917.1274108140867.JavaMail.root@cm-mail03.mozilla.org>
"Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:

> > 1) Serving XHTML+SVG or XHTML+MathML or XHTML+SVG+MathML content as
> > application/xhtml+xml to Gecko, WebKit, Presto and
> > Trident+MathPlayer
> > but serving the same bytes as text/html to Trident (sans
> > MathPlayer)
> > in order to be able to use SVG and/or MathML inline where supported
> > but allowing the users of unextended IE still read the (X)HTML
> > content of the document.
> >
> > 2) Serving application/xhtml+xml that doesn't use any non-HTML
> > features as Gecko, WebKit and Presto as a matter of pro-XML
> > principle
> > but serving the same bytes to Trident as text/html because the
> > author's pro-XML principle doesn't go far enough to exclude IE
> > users
> > from his/her audience.
> >
> > 3) Serving content as text/html but using an XML parser to process
> > the content in a non-browser scenario where the party operating the
> > XML parser has the power to make the publisher supply the content
> > in
> > a form that is safe for XML parsers.
> >
> > Leif, are there additional use cases that I'm missing?
> As someone who serves content as application/xhtml+xml to browsers
> that 
> support it, and the same content as text/html to browsers that don't,
> none of the descriptions above resonate with me.  Perhaps it is
> because 
> of manner in which you chose to express these cases.

In my thinking, your blog and planet were instances of case #1. What part of the description of #1 doesn't resonate with you?

> As for me, I simply want to be conservative in what I send.  This is
> the 
> first half of the robustness principle.  This enables people who have
> off-the shelf xml parsers to process my pages.  Not because they hold
> any special power over me, but simply because I enabled it.

Interesting. I hadn't thought of your site of being an instance of case #3 (without the power part).

Do you know if people actually process your pages (as opposed to your feeds) using off-the-shelf XML parsers without any prior arrangement with you?

Henri Sivonen
Received on Monday, 17 May 2010 14:56:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:02 UTC