Message131467
| Author |
orsenthil |
| Recipients |
eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, gennad, ivanrdg, orsenthil, python-dev |
| Date |
2011年03月20日.02:35:17 |
| SpamBayes Score |
5.4458555e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<20110320023510.GB3185@kevin> |
| In-reply-to |
<1300416764.64.0.378444258187.issue11567@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
Ezio Melotti wrote:
> This is just nitpicking, but serving XHTML as text/html is wrong.
While, I thought this statement is correct and expected the Internet
media-type should be something else (application/xhtml+xml), but as
per w3c, it is not wrong to serve XHTML as text/html (RFC 3236)
Also, have a look at the example given at:
http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/Web-Quality
Validating the present output using the validator will give a green
signal too.
>Also XHTML is not necessary here, so I would just use an HTML 4.01
>strict doctype (and remove the xmlns).
Agree to this. Although at the moment it does not cause any harm, it
is a good to be plain HTML when it is a http server.
Éric - HTML5 is not a standard yet and when it becomes one (or much
earlier, when it becomes a de-facto standard), then html producing
stdlib modules should move to it. I don't think we should move faster
than browsers or html client applications. |
|