Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
On 11 nov 2004, at 01.40, Jason Foss wrote: Is anyone aware of a good reference on configuring Apache to serve the files as the correct MIME type? Something in English would be good - a system administrator I'm not! Does it need to be set up in a per-site basis (as they're all set up as Virtual Hosts.) I'm assuming this can be done with .htaccess files? Some articles about this have been mentioned already, but here are a few more, though none of them specifically deal with content negotiation in .htaccess files: [1] < http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200408/content_negotiation/ > [2] < http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php > [3] < http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2004/11/03/content- negotiation > Note the function in [3] to convert XHTML to HTML before sending it as text/html. /Roger -- http://www.456bereastreet.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
In php, In asp, <% response.ContentType="text/HTML" %> Or whatever your chosen mime type. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joshua Street Sent: Thursday, 11 November 2004 11:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME You can use PHP to output header information, and also to do content negotiation. I don't know code for it off the top of my head, but Google probably would turn up something. Regards, Joshua Street base10solutions -Original Message- From: Richard Czeiger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 11-Nov-04 11:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME Aha! NOW i get it! Thanks Patrick. I guess with people telling you to put inline scripts as "text/JavaScript" and CSS as "text/css" I just assumed that the meta would take care of it No one said anything previously about the server bit... That's clarified it for me. BUT... If, like most of my customers, theire sharing a server at some hosting company, then it's unlikely that the host would do this to their servers... Hmmm Richard :o - Original Message - From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME Richard Czeiger wrote: > According to W3C, 'application/xhtml+xml' is the MIME type to use. > I've put it pages and seen it not only validate, but also display correctly > in IE5.0 and IE6. If IE displayed the page, rather than prompt you to download/save the file, then you're *not* really sending it as application/xhtml+xml. Taking a stab in the dark, I'd guess that all you did was change the "content type" meta to it. Well...that's not the way to do it. Your *server* needs to be configured to send out proper application/xhtml+xml, or - if you're using something like PHP server-side - you need to send the appropriate headers. If all you did was indeed just change the meta, your server is happily still sending out your page as text/html, and that's why IE is displaying it. If you have Firefox, simply go to the page in question and do "Tools > Page Info". On the resulting window, look for "Type". You're more likely seeing "text/html" there, indicating that it's not "application/xhtml+xml" Oldie but goldie on the subject: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Patrick H. Lauke _ re.dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Jason Foss wrote:
Is anyone aware of a good reference on configuring Apache to serve the
files as the correct MIME type? Something in English would be good - a
system administrator I'm not! Does it need to be set up in a per-site
basis (as they're all set up as Virtual Hosts.) I'm assuming this can
be done with .htaccess files?
Again, the article I mentioned
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html has a suggested
few lines of code for Apache (which can either be used in httpd.conf, or
an .htaccess file (which can be site wide, if it's in the site root, or
can be set on a per-directory basis depending on where you save it)
RewriteEngine on
RewriteBase /
RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} application/xhtml\+xml
RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} !application/xhtml\+xml\s*;\s*q=0
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} \.html$
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} HTTP/1\.1
RewriteRule .* - [T=application/xhtml+xml]
Patrick H. Lauke
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been following this discussion (belatedly)
It's all in the MIME
http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp
first paragraph:
" There have been a lot of articles recently about web standards; in
particular, using XHTML and serving it as text/html. Personally, I'm not
that bothered whether people serve XHTML as text/html, but think it's
important that authors understand why this is wrong. Although I'm not
bothered about content developers serving XHTML as text/html, I don't agree
with people encouraging content developers to deliver XHTML as text/html. "
I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it and its
implications?
Others have written about it and about server-side solutions to cater
for IE while still sending application/xhtml+xml to the likes of
Mozilla, Opera and the W3 HTML validator:
1 - The issue
[http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml]
2 - The parsing consequences (old, but still valid):
[http://www.hut.fi/~hsivonen/test/xhtml-suite/xhtml-index]
3 - The solution (PHP)
[http://www.workingwith.me.uk/articles/scripting/mimetypes/]
4 - The solution (.htaccess, can't recall the source):
RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} application/xhtml\+xml
RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} !application/xhtml\+xml\s*;\s*q=0
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} \.html$
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} HTTP/1\.1
RewriteRule .* - [T=application/xhtml+xml]
Ciao,
Jeroen
--
vizi fotografie & grafisch ontwerp - http://www.vizi.nl/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Richard Czeiger wrote: Thanks Patrick. I guess with people telling you to put inline scripts as "text/JavaScript" and CSS as "text/css" I just assumed that the meta would take care of it A similar problem can be seen when CSS is erroneously sent as text/plain or text/html by some badly configured servers (or in cases where people use a server-side language to dynamically create CSS, and forget to set headers accordingly). Firefox will not display/understand CSS files unless they were sent as text/css If, like most of my customers, theire sharing a server at some hosting company, then it's unlikely that the host would do this to their servers... Your host may allow you to set things via .htaccess files, or - if you're using a server-side language like PHP - you can send custom headers yourself. I use the method described roughly in the middle of http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Make sure this is sent before any other content (unless you're using output buffering) Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
You can use PHP to output header information, and also to do content negotiation. I don't know code for it off the top of my head, but Google probably would turn up something. Regards, Joshua Street base10solutions -Original Message- From: Richard Czeiger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 11-Nov-04 11:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME Aha! NOW i get it! Thanks Patrick. I guess with people telling you to put inline scripts as "text/JavaScript" and CSS as "text/css" I just assumed that the meta would take care of it No one said anything previously about the server bit... That's clarified it for me. BUT... If, like most of my customers, theire sharing a server at some hosting company, then it's unlikely that the host would do this to their servers... Hmmm Richard :o - Original Message - From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME Richard Czeiger wrote: > According to W3C, 'application/xhtml+xml' is the MIME type to use. > I've put it pages and seen it not only validate, but also display correctly > in IE5.0 and IE6. If IE displayed the page, rather than prompt you to download/save the file, then you're *not* really sending it as application/xhtml+xml. Taking a stab in the dark, I'd guess that all you did was change the "content type" meta to it. Well...that's not the way to do it. Your *server* needs to be configured to send out proper application/xhtml+xml, or - if you're using something like PHP server-side - you need to send the appropriate headers. If all you did was indeed just change the meta, your server is happily still sending out your page as text/html, and that's why IE is displaying it. If you have Firefox, simply go to the page in question and do "Tools > Page Info". On the resulting window, look for "Type". You're more likely seeing "text/html" there, indicating that it's not "application/xhtml+xml" Oldie but goldie on the subject: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** <>
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Is anyone aware of a good reference on configuring Apache to serve the files as the correct MIME type? Something in English would be good - a system administrator I'm not! Does it need to be set up in a per-site basis (as they're all set up as Virtual Hosts.) I'm assuming this can be done with .htaccess files? On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:18:24 -0300, Julián Landerreche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After reading this (http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp) my > beliefs in XHTML has been shaked. > > What is this all about? Is it a bad practice to serve XHTML as > text/html? is it harmful? what are the disvantages? > > The thuth is I cant understand what is this all about, and I didnt > really understood the whole article (for example, what's that "tag soup" > expression means?). > > After reading the article (and some related articles) I feel i'm doing > things in the wrong way (because I serve xhtml as text/html, without > even really understand what does it mean). > I'm newbie in web-standards practice, but I have strong beliefs in > standards and i like to do the things in the right way. > > I hope to hear clarifing and reassuring words from all the list, and > specially from the gurus of WSG. > > regards > Mannequin > pd: excuse my poor english. > > > > > Paul Farrell wrote: > > >>I have been following this discussion (belatedly) > >> > >> It's all in the MIME > >>http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp > >> > >>first paragraph: > >>" There have been a lot of articles recently about web > >>standards; in particular, using XHTML and serving it as > >>text/html. Personally, I'm not that bothered whether people > >>serve XHTML as text/html, but think it's important that > >>authors understand why this is wrong. Although I'm not > >>bothered about content developers serving XHTML as text/html, > >>I don't agree with people encouraging content developers to > >>deliver XHTML as text/html. " > >> > >>I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it > >>and its implications? > >> > >>with regards > >> > >>Steven Faulkner > >>Web Accessibility Consultant > >>National Information & Library Service (NILS) > >>454 Glenferrie Road > >>Kooyong Victoria 3144 > >>Phone: (613) 9864 9281 > >>Fax: (613) 9864 9210 > >>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >>National Information Library Service > >>A subsidiary of RBS.RVIB.VAF Ltd. > >> > >> > > > > > >Firstly, as a new member, I can't believe it took me so long to find WSG. > > > >As I understand it, the problem with serving XHTML as text/html is that an > >user agents view the code as 'tag soup', and therefore present malformed > >code normally. I think that as long as a developer regularly validates their > >code, they can continue to serve XHTML as text/html until MSIE supports > >application/xhtml+xml. > > > >Once again, great list. Although I find myself sitting here immersed in > >these email when I really should be working. > > > >Regards > >Paul Farrell > > > >** > >The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > >** > > > > > > > > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > -- Jason Foss Almost Anything Desktop Publishing www.almost-anything.com.au Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] North Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia "We can do almost anything!" ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Aha! NOW i get it! Thanks Patrick. I guess with people telling you to put inline scripts as "text/JavaScript" and CSS as "text/css" I just assumed that the meta would take care of it No one said anything previously about the server bit... That's clarified it for me. BUT... If, like most of my customers, theire sharing a server at some hosting company, then it's unlikely that the host would do this to their servers... Hmmm Richard :o - Original Message - From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME Richard Czeiger wrote: > According to W3C, 'application/xhtml+xml' is the MIME type to use. > I've put it pages and seen it not only validate, but also display correctly > in IE5.0 and IE6. If IE displayed the page, rather than prompt you to download/save the file, then you're *not* really sending it as application/xhtml+xml. Taking a stab in the dark, I'd guess that all you did was change the "content type" meta to it. Well...that's not the way to do it. Your *server* needs to be configured to send out proper application/xhtml+xml, or - if you're using something like PHP server-side - you need to send the appropriate headers. If all you did was indeed just change the meta, your server is happily still sending out your page as text/html, and that's why IE is displaying it. If you have Firefox, simply go to the page in question and do "Tools > Page Info". On the resulting window, look for "Type". You're more likely seeing "text/html" there, indicating that it's not "application/xhtml+xml" Oldie but goldie on the subject: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
After reading this (http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp) my beliefs in XHTML has been shaked. What is this all about? Is it a bad practice to serve XHTML as text/html? is it harmful? what are the disvantages? The thuth is I cant understand what is this all about, and I didnt really understood the whole article (for example, what's that "tag soup" expression means?). After reading the article (and some related articles) I feel i'm doing things in the wrong way (because I serve xhtml as text/html, without even really understand what does it mean). I'm newbie in web-standards practice, but I have strong beliefs in standards and i like to do the things in the right way. I hope to hear clarifing and reassuring words from all the list, and specially from the gurus of WSG. regards Mannequin pd: excuse my poor english. Paul Farrell wrote: I have been following this discussion (belatedly) It's all in the MIME http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp first paragraph: " There have been a lot of articles recently about web standards; in particular, using XHTML and serving it as text/html. Personally, I'm not that bothered whether people serve XHTML as text/html, but think it's important that authors understand why this is wrong. Although I'm not bothered about content developers serving XHTML as text/html, I don't agree with people encouraging content developers to deliver XHTML as text/html. " I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it and its implications? with regards Steven Faulkner Web Accessibility Consultant National Information & Library Service (NILS) 454 Glenferrie Road Kooyong Victoria 3144 Phone: (613) 9864 9281 Fax: (613) 9864 9210 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] National Information Library Service A subsidiary of RBS.RVIB.VAF Ltd. Firstly, as a new member, I can't believe it took me so long to find WSG. As I understand it, the problem with serving XHTML as text/html is that an user agents view the code as 'tag soup', and therefore present malformed code normally. I think that as long as a developer regularly validates their code, they can continue to serve XHTML as text/html until MSIE supports application/xhtml+xml. Once again, great list. Although I find myself sitting here immersed in these email when I really should be working. Regards Paul Farrell ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Richard Czeiger wrote: According to W3C, 'application/xhtml+xml' is the MIME type to use. I've put it pages and seen it not only validate, but also display correctly in IE5.0 and IE6. If IE displayed the page, rather than prompt you to download/save the file, then you're *not* really sending it as application/xhtml+xml. Taking a stab in the dark, I'd guess that all you did was change the "content type" meta to it. Well...that's not the way to do it. Your *server* needs to be configured to send out proper application/xhtml+xml, or - if you're using something like PHP server-side - you need to send the appropriate headers. If all you did was indeed just change the meta, your server is happily still sending out your page as text/html, and that's why IE is displaying it. If you have Firefox, simply go to the page in question and do "Tools > Page Info". On the resulting window, look for "Type". You're more likely seeing "text/html" there, indicating that it's not "application/xhtml+xml" Oldie but goldie on the subject: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
> I have been following this discussion (belatedly) > > It's all in the MIME > http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp > > first paragraph: > " There have been a lot of articles recently about web > standards; in particular, using XHTML and serving it as > text/html. Personally, I'm not that bothered whether people > serve XHTML as text/html, but think it's important that > authors understand why this is wrong. Although I'm not > bothered about content developers serving XHTML as text/html, > I don't agree with people encouraging content developers to > deliver XHTML as text/html. " > > I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it > and its implications? > > with regards > > Steven Faulkner > Web Accessibility Consultant > National Information & Library Service (NILS) > 454 Glenferrie Road > Kooyong Victoria 3144 > Phone: (613) 9864 9281 > Fax: (613) 9864 9210 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > National Information Library Service > A subsidiary of RBS.RVIB.VAF Ltd. Firstly, as a new member, I can't believe it took me so long to find WSG. As I understand it, the problem with serving XHTML as text/html is that an user agents view the code as 'tag soup', and therefore present malformed code normally. I think that as long as a developer regularly validates their code, they can continue to serve XHTML as text/html until MSIE supports application/xhtml+xml. Once again, great list. Although I find myself sitting here immersed in these email when I really should be working. Regards Paul Farrell ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Sorry guys - I'm not sure what the issue is here... According to W3C, 'application/xhtml+xml' is the MIME type to use. I've put it pages and seen it not only validate, but also display correctly in IE5.0 and IE6. So I'm having trouble understanding what the problem with using this is... or why people 'need' to use text/html... Can someone please clarify? Richard :o) Source: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.html#summary - Original Message - From: "Christian Sonne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:54 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME Well.. the standards are pretty clear on this subject: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.html#media-types http://www.w3.org/International/articles/serving-xhtml/ http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#guidelines among I can quote stuff like this: "XHTML documents served as 'text/html' will not be processed as XML [XML10], e.g. well-formedness errors may not be detected by user agents" "The 'text/html' media type [RFC2854] is primarily for HTML, not for XHTML" "...many XHTML 1.0 files are actually served using the text/html MIME type. In this case, the user agent will treat the file as HTML" It seems pretty clear that if you serve a valid xhtml1.0 document as text/html, it will be parsed as broken html by the standard sgml-parser. Moreover, if the DTD is modulated (as it is if you include the dtd for mathml) the mathml will be shown in plaintext, NOT properly rendered via the xml-parser... Basicly, if you can get away with sending as text/html, you really shouldn't be using xhtml in the first place. On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 09:23:43AM +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have been following this discussion (belatedly) > > It's all in the MIME > http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp > > first paragraph: > " There have been a lot of articles recently about web standards; in > particular, using XHTML and serving it as text/html. Personally, I'm not > that bothered whether people serve XHTML as text/html, but think it's > important that authors understand why this is wrong. Although I'm not > bothered about content developers serving XHTML as text/html, I don't agree > with people encouraging content developers to deliver XHTML as text/html. " > > I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it and its > implications? > > with regards > > Steven Faulkner > Web Accessibility Consultant > National Information & Library Service (NILS) > 454 Glenferrie Road > Kooyong Victoria 3144 > Phone: (613) 9864 9281 > Fax: (613) 9864 9210 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > National Information Library Service > A subsidiary of RBS.RVIB.VAF Ltd. > > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > Best regards (my first post, yay!) -- Christian Sonne aka. FreakCERS Stud. scient. math-phys at University of Copenhagen -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GM/S/CS/O d? s: a--->? C++ UL++>$ P+ L++ E--- W++ N o@ K? w !O M-- V? PS++(+) PE@ Y-- PGP-@ t+ 5? X++ R@ tv++ b+(++) DI+>++ D G@ e>+ h! r-(--) y? --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- http://geeksbynature.dk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Thanks Susan,
i spent a while trawling through old posts to find the thread ,
but found it instructive,
The article Serving XHTML 1.0
(http://www.w3.org/International/articles/serving-xhtml/) helped clarify
the subject for me.
with regards
Steven Faulkner
Web Accessibility Consultant
National Information & Library Service (NILS)
454 Glenferrie Road
Kooyong Victoria 3144
Phone: (613) 9864 9281
Fax: (613) 9864 9210
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
National Information Library Service
A subsidiary of RBS.RVIB.VAF Ltd.
"Susan R.
Grossman"To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] discussion
at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Sent by:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
group.org
11/11/2004 09:57
AM
Please respond to
wsg
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:23:43 +1100,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't agree
> with people encouraging content developers to deliver XHTML as text/html.
"
>
> I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it and its
> implications?
The problem from my point is the lack of support by IE and the hoops
to jump through to serve otherwise, so I will continue using xhtml 1.0
strict served as text/html.
There was a discussion of this on the list in early October , I
believe the heading was "is XHTML Dangerous" that if you haven't read,
you'd probably find interesting.
--
Susan R. Grossman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:23:43 +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't agree > with people encouraging content developers to deliver XHTML as text/html. " > > I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it and its > implications? The problem from my point is the lack of support by IE and the hoops to jump through to serve otherwise, so I will continue using xhtml 1.0 strict served as text/html. There was a discussion of this on the list in early October , I believe the heading was "is XHTML Dangerous" that if you haven't read, you'd probably find interesting. -- Susan R. Grossman [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] discussion at juicy studio: It's all in the MIME
Well.. the standards are pretty clear on this subject: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.html#media-types http://www.w3.org/International/articles/serving-xhtml/ http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#guidelines among I can quote stuff like this: "XHTML documents served as 'text/html' will not be processed as XML [XML10], e.g. well-formedness errors may not be detected by user agents" "The 'text/html' media type [RFC2854] is primarily for HTML, not for XHTML" "...many XHTML 1.0 files are actually served using the text/html MIME type. In this case, the user agent will treat the file as HTML" It seems pretty clear that if you serve a valid xhtml1.0 document as text/html, it will be parsed as broken html by the standard sgml-parser. Moreover, if the DTD is modulated (as it is if you include the dtd for mathml) the mathml will be shown in plaintext, NOT properly rendered via the xml-parser... Basicly, if you can get away with sending as text/html, you really shouldn't be using xhtml in the first place. On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 09:23:43AM +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have been following this discussion (belatedly) > > It's all in the MIME > http://www.juicystudio.com/all-in-the-mime.asp > > first paragraph: > " There have been a lot of articles recently about web standards; in > particular, using XHTML and serving it as text/html. Personally, I'm not > that bothered whether people serve XHTML as text/html, but think it's > important that authors understand why this is wrong. Although I'm not > bothered about content developers serving XHTML as text/html, I don't agree > with people encouraging content developers to deliver XHTML as text/html. " > > I wondered what other memebrs on the list thought about it and its > implications? > > with regards > > Steven Faulkner > Web Accessibility Consultant > National Information & Library Service (NILS) > 454 Glenferrie Road > Kooyong Victoria 3144 > Phone: (613) 9864 9281 > Fax: (613) 9864 9210 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > National Information Library Service > A subsidiary of RBS.RVIB.VAF Ltd. > > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > Best regards (my first post, yay!) -- Christian Sonne aka. FreakCERS Stud. scient. math-phys at University of Copenhagen -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GM/S/CS/O d? s: a--->? C++ UL++>$ P+ L++ E--- W++ N o@ K? w !O M-- V? PS++(+) PE@ Y-- PGP-@ t+ 5? X++ R@ tv++ b+(++) DI+>++ D G@ e>+ h! r-(--) y? --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- http://geeksbynature.dk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
