Click here to get back home

XHTML 1.0 Content-Negotiation
 Home | NewsGroups | Search | About
Login Password
Register Now!
 comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content
Subject Author Date
XHTML 1.0 Content-Negotiation James Pickering 08-16-2005
Get Chitika Premium
Posted by James Pickering on August 16, 2005, 5:00 pm
Please log in for more thread options

(update with re-formulated PHP)

The W3C Tutorial relating to content negotiation
http://www.w3.org/2003/01/xhtml-mimetype/content-negotiation mostly
relates to Apache. I am working on content-negotiation for my Zeus/3.4
Server. 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 have constructed a test page http://www.jp29.org/indexbak.php (a
replication of my de facto Home page http://www.jp29.org/ 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.

Checks 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:

Firefox Tools/Web Developer/Information/Vew Page Information/View
Response Headers

W3C Validator in Verbose mode --
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.jp29.org/indexbak.php


Web Caching -- http://www.web-caching.com/showheaders.html

(Added: O'Reilly RUWF facility at
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/tools/ruwf/check.html -- for XML being "well
formed").

The test page renders as XHTML 1.0 (strict) Content-Type text/html --
without XML declaration -- for me in my MSIE 6.0 browser.

I solicit comments on the validity of my exercise -- and comments in
general.

--
James Pickering


Posted by Henri Sivonen on August 17, 2005, 8:20 am
Please log in for more thread options


> 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.

Why?

Wouldn't it be simpler and more cacheable to serve HTML 4.01 to all UAs?

--
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html

Posted by James Pickering on August 16, 2005, 10:29 pm
Please log in for more thread options


Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Why?
>
> Wouldn't it be simpler and more cacheable to serve HTML 4.01 to all UAs?

Yes -- that is what I do. This is just an exercise to see if I can
effect Content-Negotiation for the Zeus server as requested in the W3C
document relating to this subject.

James Pickering


Posted by dingbat on August 17, 2005, 2:15 am
Please log in for more thread options


Henri Sivonen wrote:

> Why?

Because it's there?

This is obviously currently a pointless exercise. I wouldn't do it
myself - personally I'd serve Appendix C to everyone. But none of this
is a reason why it _shouldn't_ be done.

Actually it's an interesting exercise to serve real XML-XHTML to those
that can take it - it would avoid the ugly hack of hiding my embedded
RDF metadata away as comments in the header. James and I do seem to be
the only people still pursuing that route 8-)


FF1.0.6 seems to be working perfectly for me.


Posted by Nick Kew on August 17, 2005, 5:33 pm
Please log in for more thread options


dingbat@codesmiths.com wrote:

> Actually it's an interesting exercise to serve real XML-XHTML to those
> that can take it - it would avoid the ugly hack of hiding my embedded
> RDF metadata away as comments in the header.

If you're mixing RDF and (X)HTML, what you want is the relevant
Namespace modules to filter them on the fly. See for example
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2004/12/15/apache-namespaces.html

--
Nick Kew

Similar ThreadsPosted
More accurate testing of XHTML documents with XHTML Proxy June 5, 2006, 6:50 pm
Javascript failing xhtml [xhtml newbe] August 9, 2005, 2:49 pm
Serving XHTML as XHTML does *really* weird things. June 18, 2007, 10:46 am
Old XHTML to new XHTML/CSS: Paragraph line? January 17, 2007, 6:00 am
html 4.01, xhtml 1.0 or xhtml 1.1 July 19, 2008, 3:31 pm
Re: xhtml 1.0, xhtml 1.1, html 4.01, or html 5.X? -Guy Macon July 20, 2008, 12:28 am
Re: xhtml 1.0, xhtml 1.1, html 4.01, or html 5.X? -Guy Macon July 20, 2008, 1:56 am
Re: xhtml 1.0, xhtml 1.1, html 4.01, or html 5.X? -Guy Macon July 21, 2008, 6:05 am
Re: xhtml 1.0, xhtml 1.1, html 4.01, or html 5.X? -Guy Macon July 25, 2008, 8:57 am
XHTML & SSI July 16, 2004, 6:47 am

Our other projects:

Art Dolls, Fairies and Mermaids - Sunnyfaces.net

Roy's Linux, Programming and Search Engines messages

1-Script XML SitemapXML Sitemap