On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:05:00PM -0600, Gabe da Silveira wrote: > On 9/11/07, DHH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'd agree if the only thing Rails outputted was XML. Anyway, if > > > that's the case shouldn't the default content-type be a proper XML > > > content type such as application/xhtml+xml? > > > > It perhaps should be, if it wasn't because browser bugs caused a world > > of hurt around that. > > Although XHTML tends to be the knee-jerk doctype, the fact that it can't be > sent correctly is a concern for many developers who care about standards. > HTML is no less a standard than XHTML, and HTML 4 is equivalent of XHTML 1, > so no features are missing. > > True XHTML is a little more consistent to parse, but HTML is important > enough that there are plenty of tools that respect its empty elements.
Is the trailing-slash-to-auto-close output that we (are/were) discussing invalid HTML 4? I know it's something you don't often see anywhere except in XML, but is it *actually* illegal in HTML? It seems to me that, if the slash is legal but just odd, we could leave the slash in an get XHTML *and* HTML compatibility in one hit. - Matt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
