- From: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:48:32 +0200
- To: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Cc: "Andries Louw Wolthuizen" <info@andrieslouw.nl>, www-validator Community <www-validator@w3.org>, gez@juicystudio.com
Olivier, Andries, Am 31.07.2007 um 08:03 schrieb olivier Thereaux: >> doesn't send the HTTP_ACCEPT header with a request > > Indeed, and it doesn't have to. Some have argued it would be better > if it did. > Nobody ever sent a reasonable patch to that effect. What's about the patch on http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi? id=18 ? > Trying to work around browser bugs is very understandable, but an > improvement to this technique would be to use application/xhtml+xml > as the *default*, as it should be for XHTML 1.1. Not the other way > around. Hence: > > * if accept headers present, and application/xhtml+xml not > accepted, send text/html > * else, send application/xhtml+xml I would be lucky, if I would have such rules for Apache's httpd.conf to satisfy that. Because it seems to be very difficult to check that way (application/xhtml+xml *not* accepted), most widely spread way to check this, is the other way round: to check, if application/xhtml +xml *is* accepted. And the latter only does works, because modern web browsers *do* send an Accept-Header and *do* signalize "Yes, I accept application/xhtml +xml". If the web client signalizes, "I accept all (and nothing)" with having a "* (star)" in its Accept header, like Internet Explorer does, you have *no* possibility to check anything against. That's why from my point of view it is so helpfully to put some meaningful information into the Accept-Header of the client. Please proove your argues, Olivier, by providing a working and relieable piece of code (e.g. for Apache's httpd.conf), that checks the *absence* of application/xhtml+xml in the Accept header. This all is a mess because of the Internet Explorer, who can't deal with "application/xhtml+xml", because it doesn't know of it and doesn't have a relieably Accept header either. IE accepts "* (star)" As I said earlier: please, please splash out a reliable Accept header to the validator, as any modern web browser (except IE) also does! Please! Please don't follow the Internet Explorer in that manner! Because Internet Explorer accepts "anything" (and none, concerning XHTML), you should *not* send application/xhtml+xml as the *default* -- how would you distinguish for Internet Explorer to send "text/ html" only in that case? > I think this would be a much more sane behavior. Gez? What do you > think? Olivier, this is a far old discussion. Andries, see http:// lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2007Apr/ and validator does not supply reasonable Accept header by default http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=785 For conneg, allow choosing the Accept-* headers to send. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18 See also the following Bug comments on that issue: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18#c5 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=785#c13 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=785#c14 >> Please correct this error in your validator, and let your >> validator send a HTTP_ACCEPT header. > > Please send a patch for the validator (It's open source, the source > can be retrieved e.g from http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/validator/ ), > and/or complain to the vendor(s) of browsers not respecting the > specs. I'd personally suggest the latter - covering up bad behavior > with layers of hacks over hacks is a bad idea... An idea/patch is already avaiable at http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18 Maybe it has to be improved and adjusted to current code, but it is a beginning. Sierk -- Sierk Bornemann email: sierkb@gmx.de WWW: http://sierkbornemann.de/
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2007 11:49:26 UTC