I am still not convinced that the xml declaration should be there in the first place, or at least that it should have been added this late in the game. Look at what is happening now: we are discussing new features to work around one of the stupidest browsers in the world just because someone (just 1 person) reported some missing xml declaration. I warned against it and see the mess we're in. Revert the damned xml declarations and release 1.3 final. Pick up the issue again in 1.4 and address it properly. We have been able to build and ship wicket applications for over 3 years without the declaration, so I don't see why we can't do so another 4 months.
Martijn On Dec 28, 2007 11:02 AM, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 28, 2007 2:29 AM, Juergen Donnerstag > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 28, 2007 2:15 AM, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > But how can we know that for some pages users don't want to force the > > > quirks mode? > > > I'm big -1 on stripping the xml declaration for all pages by default. > > > > That is exactly my point. It most certainly will break existing > applications. > Agree on that. > > > > > That would break any application where the users are relying on <xml > > > declaration making IE use quirks mode. > > > > I wonder how many users actually do that compared to (IMO rather weird > > thinking) that a proper xml document will swicth IE into quirks mode > > (which is the old buggy render mode). How many users actually have the > > intend to deliberately switch into quirks mode rather than the other > > way around (use a std compliant mode). > > It's not that unusual really. It's a way to ensure that all browsers > use border-box box-sizing. Since IE doesn't support the border-box css > attribute, if you want to have sizes calculated like that you need to > force ie to go to quirks mode. I certainly don't think we can change > thing like this silently. And I don't even thing we have a reason for > it. > > Right now the problem why error pages doesn't work with IE really is > the comment between <xml declaration and doctype. I've tested it. > > > > > > > > > We should focus on the problem itself, and that is the > > > Apache header between the <?xml declaration and doctype which is what > > > completely breaks IE. > > > > I'm not sure this is true. Anything, including the xml decl, before > > the doctype makes IE switch into quirks mode. > Yes, but for our error pages we can either remove the xml declaration > or not care that it switches IE into quirksmode. Quirksmode is not the > real problem here. The problem is that right now IE doesn't show the > error pages at all, quirksmode or not. > > > > > > > > Now I can see two simple solution. Either wraps the header comment > > > with <wicket:remove> or move the header comment after doctype. > > > > I'm not sure this will work. Did you try it already? > Yes, I've tried both. They both work and IE shows the pages properly. > > If we really want the behavior when you add an <xml header> to file > and then don't want to show it in ouput, we should have a way to > configure that per file, such as <wicket:stripXmlHeader/> somewhere in > the markup. > > -Matej > -Matej > > > > Juergen > > > -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc2 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-rc1/
