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

olivier Thereaux wrote:
> The other is the question of (conditionally) serving XHTML 1.1 as 
> text/html. The spec says SHOULD NOT. I say "well, if the spec says 
> SHOULD NOT, then you should not" and I add that I don't see a good 
> reason to do it. The validator issues a warning when you do. That's 
> the proper behaviour for a SHOULD NOT.
> So... where exactly is the problem?
> If you want to do something a spec says you SHOULD NOT do, because you 
> think there's a good enough reason, it's your choice. But don't come 
> complaining if a conformance checker catches you doing it, and issues 
> a warning about it.
Actually, I beg to differ.  Neither the previous Recommendation of XHTML 
1.1 [1] nor the current Editors Draft of XHTML 1.1 [2] says you SHOULD 
NOT send XHTML 1.1 as text/html.  If you are referring to the 
informative note that was written by Masayasu [3] some years ago...  
that's not normative.


Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet:

Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 15:16:50 UTC