Good question!

>From trawling through the Nokia docs, I've found the following on the
subject of mime types;

XHTML Mobile Profile documents do not have a single MIME media type.
However, the most preferred MIME type is "application/xhtml+xml" which
should be used for serving XHTML documents to XHTML user agents. Other
available MIME type is "text/html" but the use of it for XHTML should be
limited for the purpose of rendering on existing HTML user agents. XHTML
documents served as "text/html" will not be processed as XML, e.g.
well-formedness errors may not be detected by user agents. Authors who wish
to support both XHTML and HTML user agents may utilize content negotiation
by serving HTML documents as "text/html" and XHTML documents as
"application/xhtml+xml".

Mark.  

On 25/7/03 6:20 pm, "S Woodside" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Yeah, XHTML was in some part intended to make it possible to have tiny
> light-weight (not tagsoup) HTML renderers in mobile devices. Mark, I'm
> curious, what MIME-type do they send for those pages? I'd love to send
> my pages as XHTML but none of the XHTML mime-types seem to be uniformly
> supported, and I think that the "html" output from XSL is not valid XML.
> 
> There's far too many pages out there now that claim to be XHTML but
> don't validate as XML...
> 
> simon
> 
> On Friday, July 25, 2003, at 05:55 AM, Mark Cance wrote:
> 
>> I refer to XHTML as a successor to WML in the mobile sector as the the
>> browser(s) that ship with the latest version of Symbian etc can render
>> pages
>> authored with XHTML, for example the Nokia 3650.
>> 
>> I'm aware that both 'O2 Active' and 'Vodafone Live' use XHTML to render
>> their pages on phones using their GPRS network(s). They also have WML
>> counterparts for GSM phones using older browsers.
>> 
>> I give you that XHTML is not a progression of WML, but it will
>> eventually be
>> the standard in the mobile area as in most others.... In my humble ;)
>> 
>> 
>> On 24/7/03 19:52, "Tod Harter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm not sure why you refer to XHTML as the successor to WML. WML was
>>> designed
>>> to work with WAP in very low bandwidth applications with minimal
>>> displays.
>>> XHTML on the other hand is simply targeted as the replacement for
>>> HTML 4.x.
>>> Its simply HTML 4.x which has been regularized to conform to XML
>>> syntax
>>> conventions. Most existing browsers more-or-less tolerate XHTML
>>> already
>>> (though they don't seem to implement some of the more XML-ish
>>> features...).
>>> 
>>> I certainly wouldn't consider XHTML as suitable for use with a cell
>>> phone for
>>> example. XML IN GENERAL when combined with CSS2/3 might be a
>>> different story
>>> at some point, but I don't think handheld devices generally have the
>>> level of
>>> support for CSS that would be required at this point, though honestly
>>> I have
>>> only done simple applications and its a market with a pretty wide
>>> variety of
>>> stuff...
>>> 
>>> On Thursday 24 July 2003 10:17 am, Mark Cance wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I�m trying to knock together a quick WAP version of our web site.
>>>> 
>>>> I�ve created the relevant style sheets and all would seem to be
>>>> working as
>>>> planned behind the scenes. However whenever I let AxKit parse or
>>>> produce
>>>> wml, my wap browser complains that the retrieved file is not wml.
>>>> 
>>>> If I take a copy of the source and remove the AddHandler for .wml in
>>>> my
>>>> AxKit conf. the wml works fine. I realise this has something to do
>>>> with the
>>>> headers of the file but am not sure how to fix. Any help would be
>>>> appreciated.
>>>> 
>>>> I�m also mulling over the use of wml vs. its successor xhtml, and the
>>>> implementation of a handler that can detect a mobile browsers
>>>> capabilities.
>>>> Ideally I�d like to be able to serve xhtml over wml when a browser
>>>> allows.
>>>> It would be great to hear any thoughts from anybody who�d come
>>>> across a
>>>> similar problem.
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> Mark.
> 
> --
> www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to