[whatwg] Style sheet loading and parsing (over HTTP)

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Wed May 23 00:44:53 PDT 2007

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2007, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> I wish you luck in changing the TAG's mind on things like this. I've tried
>>> and not gotten very far:
>>>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2006Aug/0027.html
>>>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2006Aug/thread.html#msg27
>> Actually, I wasn't planning to. I think that that finding is a good one, 
>> and that we should work on making less content break it.
> I recommend reading the first of the two links cited above. It describes 
> what I did to "work" on making less content break it, and why I think that 
> it's a lost cause.

Actually, I read those messages when they were written.

* I do understand that there's a gap between what the specs say 
Content-Type should do, and what works in reality.

* As we just saw with the XSLT example, making generalizations like in 
Anne's proposal is dangerous: for instance, Mozilla does check the 
content type of XSLT style sheets, and it seems people can live with 
that. In this particular case, XSLT content was served with type 
text/html, and when the problem was discovered, the author immediately 
fixed the server config.

* I think it would be bad if the W3C TAG finding on media types and a 
future W3C HTML spec would contradict each other.

* I agree that it is a good thing to collect information about what UA 
implementors need to do to be compatible with deployed content on the 
web. On the other hand, I disagree that it's a good idea to include this 
stuff as normative information into an HTML spec.

Hope this clarifies what I wanted to state.

Best regards, Julian

More information about the whatwg mailing list