Could someone please spell the appropriate markup on the XHTML versus HTML issue?
In other words, instead of the following: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> is it more proper to write the following? <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="application/xhtml+xml;charset=utf-8" /> Put another way, is the value for 'content' the key for determing MIME type? The reason I am puzzled is that the latter example (which, *if* I have understood what has been written should not work in IE because it is XHTML) appears to be identical to the former example when viewed in IE. Based on what has been written, I figure I must be misunderstanding something. TIA. -- T. R. Valentine Use a decent browser: Safari, Firefox, Mozilla, Opera (Avoid IE like the plague it is) ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
