On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 12:01:49AM +0100, Gez Lemon wrote: > On 22/06/05, David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk> wrote: > > What good reason is there for serving XHTML 1.1 as text/html? What > > advantages does it give you over Appendix C conformant XHTML 1.0 > > served as text/html? > > There is only one reason to conform to Appendix C. Appendix C is > informative - a work-around while browsers catch up. But one browser > didn't catch up. Internet Explorer Lynx Links W3M GoogleBot Then we have Konqueror which seems to run documents served as application/xhtml+xml through a tag soup slurper (I'd guess Safari does the same), and Opera which is confident enough in its XML engine that, I am told, it makes its requests with an accept header including a lowerer quality value for XHTML. Its going to be a long time before browsers really catchup. However, that doesn't answer my question. Why XHTML 1.1 (as text/html) and NOT 1.0 + Appendix C? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.ukReceived on Thursday, 23 June 2005 06:42:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:32:26 UTC