Re: content type for XHTML fragments: reformulated from Jim Ley on 2006-01-29 (www-html@w3.org from January 2006)

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:56:40 -0000
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <drihje$ile$1@sea.gmane.org>

"Daniel Schierbeck" <daniel.schierbeck@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:43DCC855.80507@gmail.com...
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:

>> I also don't see why would want to send it over the wire as 
>> application/xhtml+xml.
>
> Because it's not SVG/whatever. It *is* XHTML.

but it is not an XHTML document.  It cannot standalone as one, so it seems 
to make little sense to send it as the same type as a standalone XHTML 
document?

Jim.

Received on Sunday, 29 January 2006 13:57:18 UTC