Sent by pandy on 23 July 2004 04:04
Dave Silvester wrote:
>I was under the impression that you were 'supposed' to send XHTML 1.0
>Strict down as "application/xhtml+xml" aswell as XHTML 1.1 and it was only
>XHTML 1.0 Transitional that was 'allowed' to be sent as 'text/html'
>because it has a backwards compatibility to HTML 4...
>
>http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/#summary
>
>I am presuming that 'XHTML 1.0 Other' in the above table refers to XHTML
>1.0 Strict and therfore 'SHOULD NOT' be sent as mime type 'text/html'...
>
>Is this not the case? I am confused because many highly regarded authors
>seem to use XHTML 1.0 Strict and send it as 'text/html'...
I think "Other" simply means "Not HTML compatible", as opposed to "HTML
Compatible" in the previous column. Meaning documents that don't conform to
the HTML compatibility guidelines....
See:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml1-20011004/#media>
>I know this is off topic, but it's something that has bugged me for quite
>some time!...
Yup. But sometimes one needs to get the basics sorted out to be able to get
on with CSS. :-o
Apologies for prolonging the OT.
pandy
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
