Hi Joshua. > Thanks! I commited your patch with the sole change that I removed the > meta-content-type header, which is just bad news in my opinion.
I'm a little bit unsure about the meta-content-type header: the XHTML 1.0 specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/) recommends to use both methods to define the content-type on existing/older user agents. an extract of REC-xhtml1-20000126 follows: ======= Snip ======== Appendix C. HTML Compatibility Guidelines This appendix is informative. This appendix summarizes design guidelines for authors who wish their XHTML documents to render on existing HTML user agents ... C.9 Character Encoding To specify a character encoding in the document, use both the encoding attribute specification on the xml declaration (e.g. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="EUC-JP"?>) and a meta http-equiv statement (e.g. <meta http-equiv="Content-type" content='text/html; charset="EUC-JP"' />). The value of the encoding attribute of the xml processing instruction takes precedence. ======= Snip ======== Maybe we should put the meta-header in again ? > > By the way, a repost on the docs list would have been just as effective. > whuups, thanks...I was unsure were to put this topic; sorry for that :-) regards, erik
