![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: XHTML 1.0 served as text/html
From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 22:03:14 +0200 (EET) To: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk> cc: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, david@djwhome.demon.co.uk, karl@w3.org, link@pobox.com, www-validator <www-validator@w3.org>, www-html@w3.org Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0612062117290.235@mustatilhi.cs.tut.fi> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Philip TAYLOR wrote: >> Also, as RFC2854 says, «XHTML1 defines a profile of use of XHTML which is >> compatible with HTML 4.01 and which may also be labeled as text/html.» > > Is this true ? XHTML is not "compatible with HTML 4.01". A document cannot conform both to the HTML 4.01 and to the XHTML 1.0 specification. This follows even from the requirements on the DOCTYPE declaration, but from other aspects as well. What the RFC means is probably that XHTML 1.0 documents can be sent to _web browsers_ as indicated as HTML documents. The web browsers are called "HTML user agents" in euphemistic language, which is rather tragicomic, since the idea of sending XHTML to them is based on their _failure_ to conform to HTML specifications. > <meta name="..." content="..." /> > > Is it not the case that this may appear /within/ the head > region if interpreted as XHTML, but /terminates/ the head region > if interpreted as HTML ? Correct. See http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/empty.html for a long explanation. -- Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2006 20:03:41 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||