- From: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:52:33 -0800
- To: www-html@w3.org
There has been a bit of confusion about this question, so let restate succinctly the query. Question: What content type should be used for XHTML fragments stored independently of any XHTML document? Example: "this is <em xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">really</em> cool" Context: An application (e.g. a wiki or a newsfeed) might elect to store snippets of XHTML information in independent files, and later assemble these bits of comments into a single XHTML document to present to the browser. Obviously the application must be able to distinguish between plain text files and markup files---otherwise it would be ambiguous whether "this is <em xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">really</em> cool" should be integrated into the XHTML document as a plain text string (and therefore '<' should be encoded as <, for example), or whether the string should be interpreted as actually defining a hierarchy of XHTML elements. Relevance to www-html: RFC 3236, "The 'application/xhtml+xml' Media Type" ( http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt ), clearly states, "Please send comments to www-html@w3.org...." (section 1). This is not a "how to" question, but a "which one" question. Related Text from RFC 3236: With respect to XHTML Modularization [XHTMLMOD] and the existence of XHTML based languages (referred to as XHTML family members) that are not XHTML 1.0 conformant languages, it is possible that 'application/xhtml+xml' may be used to describe some of these documents. ... Although conformant 'application/xhtml+xml' interpreters can expect that content received is well-formed XML (as defined in [XML]), it cannot be guaranteed that the content is valid XHTML (as defined in [XHTML1]). This is in large part due to the reasons in the preceding paragraph. (section 2) Possible Responses: * Use "application/xhtml+xml", because this content type can be applied to XHTML content that does not constitute a complete XHTML document---but wrap the fragment in an outer element such as "<span xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">this is <em>really</em> cool</span>". * Use "text/xml" or "application/xml" and wrap the fragment in an outer element. * Use "application/xml-external-parsed-entity" and wrap the fragment in an outer element. Is there no specification that defines the content type of an XHTML fragment? XHTML requires an <html> element for XHTML documents, but it seems to me that a "marked-up XHTML string that is not an XHTML document" is a very common use case. Therefore so it's necessary to determine what the standard content type would be for such an XHTML fragment. Garret
Received on Monday, 16 January 2006 21:52:45 UTC