Re: [wgo] XHTML1.0 Strict vs HTML 4.01

[Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org>]

On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 04:21:59PM +0100, Quim Gil wrote:
> Question for an ignorant: would it be feasible / difficult to serve XHTML to
> browsers supporting it and then offer an alternative HTML encoding to thos
> not supporting it? Is it worth all this effort?

This should not be difficult, however I do not suggest doing this. As
far as I know, Gecko does not yet support incremental page loading for
XHTML (meaning: when served correctly), while it does for HTML.

This has probably has been said before, but you cannot just serve XHTML
as text/html and expect everything to go right. Reference:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151506#c5
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#guidelines

I saw those more often when triaging Mozilla bugs. Short description for
people not wanting to click:
<script src="foo.js" ... /> is not valid as text/html (Gecko parser will
not see the tag has been closed), while it would be under
application/xhtml+xml.


-- 
Regards,
Olav