Re: XHTML 1.0 served as text/html

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 17:22:55 -0500
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:

> 
> I may be missing something, but the validator should validate markup
> based on a given DOCTYPE and not how the markup is served. The W3C
> validator service is a _markup_ validator not a user-agent emulator.
> 

Actually, it uses the DTD for the given Doctype. The DTD's are formed
based on the TR being discussed (see Appendix A).

> -------- Original Message --------
> From: Simon Pieters
> Date: 12/5/2006 3:40 PM
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
> >> Forgive the multiplicity of named recipients, but
> >> I am very uncertain as to whom to address this :
> >>
> >> There has been a fairly protracted discussion recently
> >> concerning the pros and cons of serving XHTML documents
> >> as text/html  or as application/xhtml+xml, but I was more
> >> than a little surprised today to discover that when the
> >> W3C (HTML) validator is asked to validate
> >>
> >>     http://www.isg.rhul.ac.uk/
> >>
> >> it states that the (page) is "Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional"
> >> without issuing even a warning that it is being served as
> >> text/html rather than application/xhtml+xml.  Now it is
> >> clear from Section 5.1 of
> >>
> >>     http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/
> >>
> >> that this is acceptable, yet
> >>
> >>     http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/
> >>
> >> also states clearly that
> >>
> >>     "application/xhtml+xml SHOULD be used for XHTML Family
> >documents">
> >> My question is therefore : should not the validator issue
> >> a warning when this last guideline is ignored ?
> > 
> > The XHTML Media Types note is not normative. However, see:
> > 
> >   http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1500
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Simon Pieters
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Martin Stenmarck som ringsignal http://msn.cellus.se/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2006 03:56:53 UTC