W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?)

From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:37:09 +0100
Message-ID: <e2a28a92050623003764fd4b7e@mail.gmail.com>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Hi David,

On 23/06/05, David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk> wrote:
> 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?

A more pertinent question would be why XHTML 1.0 + appendix c? What
have you gained that couldn't have been gained with HTML? You've just
listed 5 reasons why XHTML doesn't work on today's web. All XHTML
should be delivered as application/xhtml+xml, with different levels of
how highly recommended it is. XHTML 1.1 as text/html breaks the rules
as much as XHTML + Appendix C as text/html, and has the benefit that
it's easily extensible. The guidelines say that XHTML 1.1 should be
served as application/xhtml+xml unless there are valid reasons not to.
IE is a valid reason not to on today's web, and likely to be for a
long time yet.

Best regards,


Supplement your vitamins
Received on Thursday, 23 June 2005 07:37:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:40 UTC