Lennart Jablonka dixit: > as is the case for lynx
Nope: HTTP_ACCEPT='text/html, text/plain, text/sgml, text/css, */*;q=0.01' > Also, I’m under the impression that content > negotiation à la Accept is entirely optional—the server is free to ignore Yes, but then it MUST send HTML-compatible things or it’s not an XHTML page. As simple as that. (I also serve my XHTML as text/html always and just write it in compatible mode.) >> I’m not sure whether it may then also self-close all tags but would >> assume so (except I know tech is… tricky). > > As in an XML document, <asdf/> and <asdf></asdf> are entirely equivalent, yes, > the server may then “self-close” all empty elements. That’s what made me say I’d assume so, but I know tech, which is why I hesitate. > It might be smart to do, but is not a requirement, is it? A server sending an > XHTML document as application/xhtml+xml, not in any way stating that it is > valid HTML syntax, need not restrict the XML syntax, does it? Such a server would not serve a standard-conformant XHTML webpage. >> tl;dr it’s a mess… > > It for sure is. aye, //mirabilos -- /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon ╲ ╱ Campaign against ╳ HTML eMail! Also, ╱ ╲ header encryption!