- From: Oliver Hunt <oliver@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:14:39 -0700
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, www-svg@w3.org
Whilst technically the standard allows xhtml to be served as text/ html, to my knowledge *no* major browser will recognise it as such, as this would cause too many pages to break. For a document to be treated as xhtml it must have the application/ xhtml+xml mime type. --Oliver On 10/07/2007, at 3:51 PM, Chris Lilley wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 10, 2007, 10:05:01 PM, David wrote: > > DW> Chris Lilley wrote: > >>> that img is an empty element. Its not part of the image url. It does >>> not indicate malformed html. > > DW> It is malformed HTML. > > Actually, no. > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> > > DW> It is served as text/html, > > as allowed by XHTML 1.0 > > DW> and XHTML in > DW> Appendix C compatibility mode > > (non-normative) > > DW> relies on typical browser handling > DW> of malformed HTML [A] (which doesn't, in general, generate the > same > DW> parse tree as a real XHTML user agent). > > So, making it non-well-formed by omitting the trailing slash on an > empty element would improve things, in your opinion? > > DW> It shouldn't cause a problem on mainstream browsers, but it is not > DW> valid, > > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/ > Overview.html > > "This Page Is Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!" > > DW> and there is an increasing belief in the HTML community that > DW> Appendix C mode was a very bad idea. > > Now, there I agree. Appendix C was tremendously short sighted. > > DW> [A] and mishandle technically valid, but rarely supported HTML > features. > > > > > -- > Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org > Interaction Domain Leader > Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group > W3C Graphics Activity Lead > Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG > >
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 23:14:54 UTC