[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: Fw: XHTML 1.0 returned to HTML WG

>I don't understand why they were using text/xml in the first place.  First
>of all, XHTML is still HTML, and there is a well-defined media type for it:
>text/html.  But more importantly, XHTML is largely an exercise in
>pragmatism; it's intended to work in older browsers (cf. <br /> syntax) -
>text/html will work in older browsers, while text/xml won't.  Is this a
>hard decision?

No, but it's a lot worse (potentially) than just "won't work".
If XHTML 1.0 is commonly delivered as */xml now, then future
processors might very well be expected to understand, for
example, <img src=""> even though that syntax would be
deprecated in a future version of XML that included XLink.

Not that this problem is insurmountable, but it probably is
likely premature to allow it now before we consider the
possible consequences.

Mark Baker                     Personal Apps Lead, Sun Microsystems
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA   http://java.sun.com/products/personalapps