[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Microsoft's deeply cynical appeal to"standards compliance"

• From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@g...>
• To: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@n...>
• Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:36:16 +0200

* Benjamin Franz wrote:
>In an argument between Content-Type: (a HTTP protocal layer declaration)
>and DOCTYPE (an explicit declaration _within_ the document as to what it
>is that exists even when a document is NOT being delivered via the web),
>DOCTYPE wins.

MIME Type wins for parsing, that's what the HTML WG wants.

>XHTML works fine in practice. I have used it routinely for well over a
>year (I even have an 'XHTML compatibility' guidelines page posted on my
>company intranet for it). XHTML aware browsers 'get it' automatically,
>HTML browsers are (with vanishingly few exceptions) NOT SGML parsers and
>so 'get it' as well.

Some of them do, but beeing no SGML parsers makes them non-compliant.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann { mailto:bjoern@h... } http://www.bjoernsworld.de
am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 { http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 } http://www.learn.to/quote/

• References:
  • Re: Microsoft's deeply cynical appeal to"standards compliance"
    • From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@g...>
  • Re: Microsoft's deeply cynical appeal to"standards compliance"
    • From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@n...>

• Prev by Date: expectations (was Re: Microsoft's deeply cynical appealto"standards comp liance")
• Next by Date: RE: Microsoft's deeply cynicalappealto"standards compl iance"
• Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft's deeply cynical appeal to"standards compliance"
• Next by thread: RE: Microsoft's deeply cynical appeal to"standards compliance"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread