Re: [ANN] Beta test of the W3C Markup Validator (0.8.0 beta 1)

Sierk Bornemann wrote:
> 
> Am 24.04.2007 um 12:14 schrieb olivier Thereaux:
> 
>> The rule for XHTML 1.1 is that it should always be served as 
>> application/xhtml+xml. The technique you are using, to serve it 
>> conditionally as text/html, goes against that rule.
> 
> I want to use XHTML 1.1, and I want to serve the apropriate MIME type to 
> all browsers, which do suffice these standards requirements and who 
> support this MIME type. So the only web browser, who is served with 
> "text/html" seems to be the Internet Explorer (which has got a lower 
> priority in my concerns, but that is another debate). per default, I 
> serve the .html-Suffix as "text/html", if the client/web browser does 
> supply "application/xhtml+xml", it will be delivered with that MIME 
> type. If the client/web browser doesn't supply this MIME type, then it 
> will be served as "text/html".
> 
> My question is: why doesn't the validator catch that MIME type, that is 
> served as "text/html" but re-written to "application/xhtml+xml"? I must 
> assume, that the current validator 0.8 beta doesn't send an 
> Accept-Header, so that the Rewrite-Rule has no chance to work.
> If I am right, why doesn't validator 0.8 beta send an Accept-Header, and 
> would'nt it be better to do so?
> If validator 0.8 beta *does* send an Accept-Header, why doesn't my 
> rewrite-rule work as it works with other user agents like Firefox, Opera 
> and Safari?

The beta does not send an accept header.

By not positively asserting that it accepts XHTML, it is pedantically 
applying a rule in a way that penalizes those that are attempting to do 
the right thing in the face of indifference and inaction by the vendor 
of the dominant browser.

- Sam Ruby