W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2007

fallback for css-file (was Re[2]: Improving alt (was handling fallback content for still images))

From: Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 08:19:54 +0300
Message-ID: <968227048.20070713081954@narod.ru>
To: public-html@w3.org

Good day, Jon.

JB> <link src="./a.jpg"><i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b></link>
JB> <link src="./a.mpg"><i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b></link>
JB> <link src="./a.wav"><i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b></link> 

JB> Current browsers move <link> from inside <body> to the <head> as
JB> a void element, and leave the "contents" of <link> in place.  

And what's about

<head>
  <link href="./styles.css" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet">
    <i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b>
  </link>
</head>

to inform browsers in case, if css-file is un-accessable ?
Deal is that, css-file can contain some content:
pseudo-elements, binding ...

---

JB> I suggest that <object> be used for all other cases
but only without attribute @type for graphic, video and sound files

JB> I don't think IE's poor handling of <object> fallback is enough
JB> reason to abandon <object> for a new element, especially when
JB> browsers, including IE, already support <object>
+1



Dmitry Turin
HTML6     (6.1.2)  http://html60.chat.ru
SQL4      (4.1.2)  http://sql40.chat.ru
Unicode2  (2.0.0)  http://unicode2.chat.ru
Computer2 (2.0.3)  http://computer20.chat.ru
Received on Friday, 13 July 2007 12:57:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:02 GMT