- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:56:43 +0200
- To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- CC: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
Steven Pemberton wrote: > ... > Actually I never have any problems getting XHTML into IE to speak of, > and don't really understand the fuss. Even using application/xhtml+xml > works (see http://www.w3.org/International/tests/sec-ruby-markup-1.html > as an example). I know that there are some differences, but in the vast > majority of deployed pages, with a little forethought you're never going > to have any major issues. > ... This one caught me by surprise :-) Digging deeper shows that you rely on IE's content-sniffing kicking in. This seems to depend on the extension being "html" (it won't work with "xhtml", for example). So IE is interpreting the page as HTML, not XHTML. BTW: the page claims: <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 11:57:25 UTC