Community
Participate
Working Groups
We should define an XHTML content type, to better handle default encoding rules, editor association, etc. See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt It "recommends" file extentions of ".xht", ".xhtml", and ".html". See also section called "5. Recognizing XHTML files". They "recommend" that if strictly checking for XHTML content, its more than "beginning with <?xml".
*** Bug 137301 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Bug 258676 is implementing this. Once it has been resolved this bug can be too. Didn't want to dup because the bugs are for different things so thought it was most logical to add the dependency.
We have no plans to implement a new content type for XHTML. We have a lot of other existing ways to tell if a document is XhTML without having to specify a new content type.