Sorry - didn't mean to come across as a wiseass. The xml declaration
threw me off. Back in the day it sent IE into quirksmode no matter the
doctype... :D

Rare to see pages served as application/xhtml+xml (not just text/html)
nowadays. Wonder if that is what triggers the bug...

On Feb 19, 5:15 am, Garret Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 7:38 pm, rasmusfl0e <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > You might get better results using an actual XHTML doctype...
>
> That is an actual XHTML doctype. 
> See:http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#the-doctype
>
> It's not a doctype of XHTML 1.0 strict or transitional; nor of XHTML
> 1.1. It provides no DTD for validation. But it is a doctype of "XHTML"
> in its general sense, which is HTML served as well-formed XML.
>
> > There's
> > no telling how browsers will react combining an xml declaration with
> > an HTML5 doctype
>
> I doubt there will be a problem. See:
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5629/any-reason-not-to-start-using...
>
> Anyway, that's not the issue here (if it's an issue anywhere).
>
> > (HTML5!=xml).
>
> That is incorrect. HTML5 supports being served as XML---which yields
> XHTML 5:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/introduction.html#html-vs-xhtmlhttp://www.w3.org/TR/html5/the-xhtml-syntax.html#the-xhtml-syntax
>
> > You might want to stay clear of using an xml declaration if what
> > you're building is supposed to work in IE (no support for application/
> > xhtml+xml yet).
> > If that's even an option with the framework you're using.
>
> The framework I'm using is my own framework which I wrote from the
> ground up around 2005, before JQuery, Prototype, or MooTools were
> available. My framework correctly recognizes anemic browsers such as
> IE and serves them the XHTML as text/html, so there is no XHTML issue
> on those browsers.
>
> But all this is beside the point. I'm not talking about IE or other
> browsers that don't correctly process well-formed XHTML. I'm talking
> about a browser, Firefox, that understands XHTML perfectly well. My
> framework has been serving XHTML successfully to Firefox <3 for over
> five years---albeit until recently with a custom XHTML 1.1 modularized
> DTD. The point is that my framework makes it near impossible to have
> non-well-formed XHTML---unless you mix in a framework such as
> MooTools, which is currently spoiling the stew.

Reply via email to