I’ve switched the DOCTYPE of these pages to XHTML 1.0 Transitional, even though I will continue to “code” to Strict. Why? Because Dean Burge makes sense: the XHTML media types summary from the W3C suggests that XHTML 1.0 Strict should not be sent as text/html. Until user agents can consistently support application/xhtml+xml (yes, I’m looking at you, Internet Explorer), I’m treating the markup as Transitional and sticking with text/html.

I thought about serving up Strict to user agents that claim support for application/xhtml+xml. Paul went that route a while back, before he went off the deep end and moved to HTML (albeit for sound reasons). It just doesn’t seem worth the trouble, though, especially since I’m not doing anything very XML-like with the XHTML at this point. Until I do, I’m not entirely comfortable calling it Strict. Although one could claim that technically it is, it’s the spirit of the matter that sways me.