- From: Pete Harlow <peter.harlow@thales-transportservices.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 14:43:59 +0200
Malcolm Rowe wrote: > Alternatively, if you don't care about ever sending it using the right > MIME type, why bother writing it as XHTML? At the time I wrote it, my reference was the w3c's xhtml1 section 5.1, which says text/html is one of two valid mime types, as does the referred rfc2854: <quote> Published specification: The text/html media type is now defined by W3C Recommendations; the latest published version is [HTML401]. In addition, [XHTML1] defines a profile of use of XHTML which is compatible with HTML 4.01 and which may also be labeled as text/html. </quote> Believe me, I do care about MIME types, I even changed ISP once as one insisted in sending css as text/plain, which breaks several browsers. I used XHTML as I felt using the latest HTML spec was the Right Thing (TM) to do - and even following appendix C it was a royal PITA to get the thing to look roughly the same in all the UAs I test with. I've no intention of using a MIME type other than text/html for the forseeable future, if that stops IE rendering the page. Regards, Pete. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Thales, its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt.
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2004 05:43:59 UTC