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

Re: Proposal: accessibility revision for the img element...

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:06:41 +0200
To: "Ben Boyle" <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>, "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: "Olivier GENDRIN" <olivier.gendrin@gmail.com>, "Sander Tekelenburg" <st@isoc.nl>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tuiw1fvt64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:01:59 +0200, Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>  
wrote:
> Still, it would be good if the spec allowed for it so that one future
> day we can use <img> consistently ... the proposal to add <image>
> (separate to <img>) has merit I believe... leaving <img> as is for
> compatibility and introducing <image> for consistency with <video> and
> <audio>. I vote for this option.

Apparently it was not clear before: we can't change parsing rules for  
<img> and <image>. <image> turns into <img> during parsing for legacy  
reasons. Neither element has a closing tag. I believe the goal for this WG  
is to remain backwards compatible. Not invent a new language on top of the  
old one.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 10:07:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:01 GMT