W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > May 2005

Object Element Re: WaSP Asks the W3C (2005)

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 09:31:18 -0400
Message-Id: <E9253F9A-5A91-47AF-8E98-A07E724AC909@w3.org>
Cc: "'public-evangelist@w3.org' w3. org" <public-evangelist@w3.org>
To: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>

Hi Anne,

Le 05-05-25 à 02:41, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
> I was wondering how OBJECT is supposed to work in future versions  
> of XHTML when XHTML 2.0 changes the name of the DATA attribute to  
> SRC. Also, how relevant is OBJECT in XHTML 2.0?

I think this has already been discussed on www-html, I encourage you  
to read the thread starting at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2004Jul/thread.html#6

There's also a reference in the thread to
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#whyxhtml2

Be sure to read every emails in the thread, I think Paul Crowley had  
the same questions than you.

> And how far is this future were non-strict web content breaks? Now  
> even mobile devices can render the most ugly nested tag soup usable  
> and this size of including such a parser is probably negligible I  
> think we might never lose it. There is even an effort going on to  
> standardize HTML parsing rules. With other words: defining error  
> handling similar to CSS.

That is definitely a question you should ask to the HTML WG. An error  
mechanism is always good, but it's not the task of public-evangelist  
to define such mechanism.

Though, you are in accordance with what the QA WG recommend in QA  
Framework Specification Guidelines:
     http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#error

There are something for such things in the last WD of XHTML 2.0
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/conformance.html#s_conform_user_agent
     Point 4. to 8.

If you think, it's not enough, you should really send an email to the  
HTML WG at www-html-editor@w3.org .

I have in plan to do a _deep_ review of XHTML 2.0 when the last call  
is published, I will be happy to read your comments about it, not on  
public evangelist which is not here for that. Though on public  
evangelist, participants could try to give opinions how to improve  
the educational part of the specification.


Best.
-- 
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2005 13:31:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:19 UTC