- From: Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 07:15:01 +0900
- To: steve@wordpool.co.uk
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004, Steve Kimpton wrote: > You'll notice that the file is just ...valid-html401 It's important to understand that it is not the *file* we are talking about here, but the URI referencing a resource on the web. Not only is that very remote, conceptually, from a file, but this difference between information space and a file system also has important practical implications (see below). > valid-html401.gif or valid-html401.png although I now see that both of these > are in your Icons directory. Precisely. The fact that the link points to foo and that the server holds foo.gif and foo.png is not a mistake, but a way to serve different variants (in format) of the same resource (the valid HTML 4.01 icon) depending on what the browser claims to prefer. Search "http format negotiation" or "http content negotiation" in your favorite Web search engine for more details on this. > I'm guessing this is the reason for his problem. I doubt it, but this is not impossible, if this person's browsers claim to support a type of image it does not actually support. But then it's the browser that is broken, and there is little we can do. Hope this answers your questions. Regards, -- olivier
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2004 18:15:03 UTC