Then there is the situation of low-cost shared hosting. Perhaps you folks can help clear up this question:
Our community sites reside on telus shared-hosting (apache servers) and while I try to 'follow' the excellent advice I find here on the list and elsewhere, we're not getting the results we would expect. We have no control over the http headers. Even though I've mounted XHMTL 1. 0 Strict with the MIME type application/xhtml+xml, Mozilla still shows it as text/html. Should I revert back to text/html, since this would appear to be what is being served out, beyond our control? Roy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Sione Taumoefolau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 8:02 AM Subject: RE: [WSG] invalid xhtml Hi Patrick, > I beg to differ on this hair-splitting point: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801/#text-html > > "[XHTML1] defines a profile of use of XHTML which is compatible with HTML > 4.01 and which may also be labeled as text/html" I'm not sure that we differ on this point. The W3C dictates that we MAY (1) serve XHTML1 as HTML. Good sense(2) argues that we SHOULD serve XHTML as application/xhtml+xml. Doing otherwise is disingenuous(3) and could introduce subtle bugs, and lord knows we have enough subtle bugs to work around as is. Cheers, Andrew Taumoefolau 1. Apologies for busting out the RFC language. 2. http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml 3. We ought to be proud that we're serving xml! :) ***************************************************** 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 *****************************************************
