Sebastián Monía writes: > Jim Porter writes: >> Thoughts on just simplifying to checking for "> way, we'd also guess "text/html" for all the (mostly obsolete) HTML >> doctypes here: . > > It sounds like a good idea, can provide a patch in a couple days (maybe > tomorrow). That leaves some time for dissenting voices to express any > concerns with this approach. Attached a patch with the corrections mentioned so far.