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

Re: Nested browsing context (was: fear of "invisible metadata")

From: Thomas Broyer <t.broyer@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:53:33 +0200
Message-ID: <a9699fd20706260653ua3f03d6h4ccbff6ea11ab158@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-html@w3.org
2007/6/26, Sander Tekelenburg:
>
> > <quick hack>
> > The object element can contain an image or a "nested browsing context"
> > [whatever that is] for inline processing, or it an contain a file to be
> > processed by a plug-in or helper application.
> >
> > The data attribute specifies the address of the file. If present [{frown
> > }it's not required?], the attribute must be a URI (or IRI).
> > </>
[...]
> As to "nested browsing context": I'd have to first understand what is meant
> with that before I could suggest something that would be understandable to
> more people.

Er, well, it means you'll have a "browsing context" nested within the
page where the <object> lives. What is a browsing context? Er, well, a
place where you can "browse", with its own navigation history, script
"sandboxing" (i.e. a script running in a browser context cannot access
another browser context except if it "comes from" the same domain),
etc.

In short, an <object> "containing" a nested browsing context is just
like an <iframe> (similar to an <object> containing an image is just
like an <img> –except for the rich fallback content–, and <object>
containing a video is just like a <video>, etc.)
Actually, that's where IE fails today: when you write <object
type="image/jpeg" src="...">some fallback content</object>, IE
incorrectly creates a nested browsing context (hence the border,
margins/padding, scrollbars and the image is not resized) instead of
"just showing the image".

-- 
Thomas Broyer
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 13:53:36 GMT

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