- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 15:05:24 +0100
- To: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On 1 Jul 2007, at 11:58, Philip TAYLOR wrote: > Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > * <embed>fallback</embed> > > - pro: consistent with <object> fallback. > > - con: not backwards compatible at all, embed is an empty element. > > Since WHATWG have jettisoned SGML as the foundation on which > HTML is based, and gone on to define a parsing model of their > own, what is to stop that model from specifying that if > an <embed> tag is encountered, the parser is required to > look ahead (honouring nesting) until the first unmatched > </ ...> tag is encountered. If that tag is </embed> > (case-insensitive), then <embed> is being used as a container > and parsed as such; if it is anything other than </embed> > (case-insensitive), then if it matches the currently open > nest it should close it, otherwise the error-handling actions > should be invoked. What there is to stop that is that it is not compatible with what browsers currently do (the entire parsing algorithm is backwards compatible with current browsers — if it isn't, the spec needs to be fixed). - Geoffrey Sneddon
Received on Sunday, 1 July 2007 14:05:32 UTC