Netscape Navigator 4.08 - MIME Type text/html: Web-Sniffer - View HTTP Request and Response Header - reports for served as XHTML 1.0 via Content-Negotiation:įireFox 1.0.6 - MIME Type application/xhtml+xml: Objective: To serve XHTML 1.0 documents as Content-Type application/xhtml+xml - with XML declaration - to browsers that recognize that MIME type and as text/html - without XML declaration (in order to render in "standards" mode) - to other browsers. Two useful resources for those contemplating XHTML 1.0 Content Negotiation: Subject: Re: XHTML Content Negotiation revisited HTML 4.01 (strict) Markup for my Web pages. I am indeed well familiar with your cited references. I am sure you are familiar with the W3C XHTML 1.0 Specification Appendix I would go and read these articles, before thinking "maybe HTML 4.01 If you write client-sideĭOM Scripts (the new name for DHTML, basically), you will need to useĭifferent DOM methods (document.createElement vsĭocument.createElementNS) depending on whether your XHTML is served as Sorry, I probably didn't make myself clear. The PHP scripting is a pre-processor to generate headers > No, the markup is preset and validated - the XML is checked for > DOM Scripts for the two styles of rendering (text/html vs > "All good stuff, but as I mentioned before: are you going to fork your No, the markup is preset and validated - the XML is checked for
"All good stuff, but as I mentioned before: are you going to fork your Site, then sure: go ahead, use content negotiation.įollowing are the HTTP Request and Response Headers for my Content Negotiation test page If you can *guarantee* that you won't be using DOM Scripting in your Value to their web sites and applications. Client-side scripting isn'tĮvil if done properly, and more and more people are using it to add I'd wager that this is a big show stopper. > I solicit comments on the validity of my exercise - and comments inĪll good stuff, but as I mentioned before: are you going to fork yourĭOM Scripts for the two styles of rendering (text/html vs I solicit comments on the validity of my exercise - and comments in general.
The test page renders as XHTML 1.0 (strict) Content-Type text/html - without XML declaration - for me in my MSIE 6.0 browser. (Added: O'Reilly RUWF facility at - for XML being "well formed"). W3C Validator in Verbose mode - uri=http%3A//Web Caching. I have constructed a test page (a replication of my de facto Home page which is served as html 4.01) that I am attempting to serve as application/xhtml+xml in my Firefox 1.0.6 browser and as Content-Type: text/html in my MSIE 6.0 browser.Ĭhecks of my test page served as XHTML 1.0 (strict) Content-Type application/xhtml+xml - with XML declaration - in my Firefox 1.0.6 browser:įirefox Tools/Web Developer/Information/Vew Page Information/View Response Headers My interim goal is to serve XHTML 1.0 documents as Content-Type application/xhtml+xml - with XML declaration - to Firefox browsers and as text/html- without XML declaration (in order to render in "standards" mode) - to MSIE browsers. I am working on content-negotiation for my Zeus/3.4 Server. The W3C Tutorial relating to content negotiation mostly relates to Apache. Subject: XHTML Content Negotiation revisited Number of posts in this thread: 8 (In chronological order)