[Pmwiki-users] [XHTML] My Experiment - Final local.php setup

John Feezell johnfeezell
Sun Jul 13 13:27:16 CDT 2003

Thanks.  It was interesting to develop.

I have made comments below using %comment% as a marker.

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:26:57 -0600, Patrick R. Michaud <pmichaud at pobox.com> 

> John-
> This is excellent work, thanks!  I have a few observations and a few
> questions...
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 06:51:47PM -0500, John Feezell wrote:
>> xhtml reference
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801/
> This reference is *exactly* what I needed.  To summarize it for the 
> group, XHTML documents SHOULD have a Content-Type of 
> "application/xhtml+xml".  But at least one major browser (IE) doesn't 
> support this yet.  Thus, the fallback position appears to be to use a 
> Content-Type of "text/html" to have a browser render an XHTML document.  
> If you use "text/xml", the browser may
> treat it as an XML application (IE displays it as an XML parse tree).

%comment% The above is my understanding of the situation currently.  It 
seems to me that the "application/xhtml+xml" is on the "bleeding" edge of 
development.  The safe path for now is "text/html" since I believe that it 
would be correctly render in current browsers.  The use of "text/xml" is 
possible but for final rendering in "html" format it requires the use of 
css or xsl associated files.  IE 5.5 supports the xsl to some extend but I 
know that Opera does not.
Some I believe confuse html and xml and believe that xml will totally 
replace xml.  If fact they have different purposes and html or xhtml will 
probably be around for a long time yet.

>> $HTMLDoctypeFmt = '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"  
>> standalone="no" ?>
>> <!DOCTYPE html
>> PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
>> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
>> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
>> <head>';
>> $HTTPHeaders[] = "Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1";
> I'm curious--in the DOCTYPE, is there any particular reason for choosing
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd" over the W3C- 
> recommended value of "DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"?
> (See http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xhtml1-20000126/#docconf).

For the http:// ... I simply used what was in the Cookbook/XHTML page.  If 
the alternative form is better, then I would move to it.  If appears that 
the reference should be as indicated above.

> I've updated the Cookbook page to reflect the changes, information,
> and suggestions John has made--see 
> http://www.pmichaud.com/wiki/Cookbook/XHTMLOutput.  I've also added
> a "Browser Compatibility" section to that page where we can record
> browser compatibility.
> Again, thanks for the excellent analysis and summary!
> Pm

More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list