Re: encoding: not always required

Thank you for your reply. I just found the following page which 
explains everything I asked about in this post (plus the fact
that I should use the .xhtml / .xht extension as outlined in
/etc/mime.types and /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801/

which states:

"In summary, 'application/xhtml+xml'
SHOULD be used for XHTML Family documents"

Regards,

Neil

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Terje Bless wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Neil Zanella <nzanella@cs.mun.ca> wrote:
> 
> >If you name it hello.xml and run it through the validator than
> >everything works fine. However, if I name it hello.html then the
> >validator complains.
> 
> The determination of character encoding depends on the Content-Type the
> document is served as, and this in turn is often determined based on what
> filename extension is used. In particular, for files served with an XML
> Content-Type the XML defaulting rules take effect, whereas for text/html they
> do _not_.
> 
> I strongly recommend that you configure your server to send out the correct
> character encoding in the Content-Type header field. It is the most certain
> way of ensuring that there is no confusion as to what the character encoding
> of the document is.
> 
> See, e.g., <http://www.w3.org/International/O-HTTP-charset> for further
> information.
> 
> - -- 
> Of course we are the good guys! We define what is good and evil. All other
> definitions are wrong, and possibly the product of a deranged imagination.
>                                                          -- Stephen Harris
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP SDK 3.0.2
> 
> iQA/AwUBPwXbdqPyPrIkdfXsEQLpdQCeI+kDKvLZEZgM0883SXprowVxSnAAn0H8
> 4JXyYrY7+kCwwIBp+3GrMgJU
> =+Ynb
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

Received on Friday, 4 July 2003 20:30:28 UTC