Hi Nikita, > Are you talking about putting an HTML doctype on > XHTML 1.1-formatted code Yes, but normally you would put XHTML 1.1 markup into an template written for a different DOCTYPE as shown in this screen shot:
http://xstandard.com/94E7EECB-E7CF-4122-A6AF-8F817AA53C78/html-layout-xhtml-content.gif Regards, -Vlad http://xstandard.com -------- Original Message -------- From: Nikita The Spider The Spider Date: 2008-05-13 8:43 AM > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 10:57 PM, XStandard Vlad Alexander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> HTH wrote: >> >...server has to do content negotiation in order to send >> >>> text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and >> >application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means >> >you're generating two copies of all of your content >> Assuming your are not writing static pages, you only need to generate one >> copy of content in XHTML 1.1 format and then serve it as any version of HTML >> as you like. > > I'm not sure what you mean -- I understand the XHTML 1.1 part, but > what do you mean then by "serve it as any version of HTML"? Are you > talking about putting an HTML doctype on XHTML 1.1-formatted code, or > serving XHTML 1.1 with the text/html media type, or something else? > > >> HTH wrote: >> > Furthermore, content negotiation itself is some work to >> > get done correctly >> At most, maybe 10 lines of code. Please see: >> http://xhtml.com/en/content-negotiation/ > > My point exactly -- that code is not correct. It produces the wrong > result when presented with an Accept header of */* which is valid (see > http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.1) and > indicates that the client can accept application/xhtml+xml. > > The code is also wrong in that the Accept header can contain > preference indicators ("q=..."). It's valid for a client to indicate > that it accept both text/html and application/xhtml+xml but prefers > the former. A straightforward substring search won't get the job done > correctly. > > It's true that these are unusual cases and the consequences of getting > it wrong are minor (text/html sent instead of application/xhtml+xml). > But my point was that it is easy to make mistakes, even if you're > getting it right most of the time. > > There was a recent discussion (pretty vocal, if I remember correctly) > on the W3 Validator list about the subject of content negotiation > involving people with a deeper understanding and appreciation of the > standards than me. You might find it interesting reading. > > Cheers > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
