- From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:47:54 +0100
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:41:29 +0100, Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-what at farside.org.uk> wrote: > Jim Ley writes: > > >> And no, you can't send an XForms document as text/html, because it's > >> neither valid HTML nor XHTML Appendix C-compliant. > > There's no requirement that text/html be either of those things, to be > > served. > > Yes, there is. RFC 2854 [1] defines the valid contents for text/html data as > either HTML 4.01 or XHTML 1.0 complying with Appendix C. No it does not (any HTML formats including tag-soup is allowable) and if it does, then the WF2 couldn't be served as text/html either unless it went to the W3C who have change control over it chose to change the registration. > If you need more references, the W3C TAG's 'Authoritative Metadata' > finding[2] basically says, among other things, that if you send me something > marked as text/html, I must not interpret it as anything other than > text/html as defined by spec; in particular, I must not interpret it as a > XForms document, or a document with XML namespaces. So it must not be interpreted as a Web Forms 2 document either then. Jim.
Received on Thursday, 24 June 2004 08:47:54 UTC