User-Agent: Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 When a web server supporting content negotiation provides an (X)HTML page and an equivalent XUL document, as XUL is far more convenient for it's purpose, user interface, than HTML is, Mozilla should use the XUL document. So application/vnd.mozilla.xul+xml should be included in the Accept header. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Go to a URL providing transparent content negotiation with a XUL and an HTML alternatives Actual Results: The HTML one is received from server Expected Results: The XUL one should be received from server
The reason we didn't do this in the past is that there are so many XUL-supporting browsers out there (Netscape 7, all previous versions of Mozilla and Mozilla Firebird, Beonex etc.) that if we put it in and people started using it, a lot of browsers would get unfairly excluded. That argument gets more true the longer we don't have it in there. Gerv
*** Bug 241427 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Well, longer you will waiting for correcting this, harder it will be possible. And when Microsoft will start promoting XAML, Moz will be out. For creating virtual listing, web applications,.... we should have possibility onto the server-side to know if we can switch in xul with another method than guessing, or any ugly manners. Just think about websites using flash... After that, rewriting by example virtual listing extension for apache will be faster, more user-friendly and more convincing for moz.
XAML has nothing to do with this. Accept: as content negotiation header, with exhaustive list of MIME types supported, is a complete failure. We should not bloat our Accept: headers to include XUL's vendor MIME type. /be