- From: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 23:52:35 +0900
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: derhoermi@gmx.net, link@tss.no, ajvincent@hotmail.com
[ www-html only ] Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote: > * Terje Bless wrote: > > As of February 2001, the HTML WG has taken no official position on > > what MIME media type should be used to describe XHTML 1.0 or any > > other XHTML based language, > > That's quite wrong, text/xml and application/xml are appropriate. The HTML WG did think so, too, and the first Proposed Recommendation of XHTML 1.0 said [1]: 5.1 Internet Media Type Work is currently in progress to determine how Internet media types [RFC2046] should be used when delivering XML documents, and this will be the subject of a future W3C document. Since XHTML is an XML application, XHTML documents may be delivered using the Internet media type text/xml or type application/xml [RFC2376]. Additionally, since one of the aims of XHTML is to allow migration from existing HTML user agents to XHTML user agents, XHTML documents may be delivered using the Internet media type text/html. In this case, it is recommended that the documents follow the guidelines in Appendix C to decrease the chance of document processing failure. But we've got a number of objections to use "text/xml" or "application/xml" for XHTML, so the first XHTML 1.0 PR had to be returned to the Working Group. That's why section 5.1 of XHTML 1.0 REC had to be silent about "text/xml" or "application/xml". [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-xhtml1-19990824/#media Regards, -- Masayasu Ishikawa / mimasa@w3.org W3C - World Wide Web Consortium
Received on Monday, 4 June 2001 10:52:04 UTC