- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 19:41:57 +1000
- To: Jeff Cutsinger <jeff@cutsinger.org>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
Jeff Cutsinger wrote: > Ok. Let's use an example: the new video element. Whether you like it or > not is irrelevant. This is about backwards compatibility. > > <video src='my.mov'></video> > > Obviously, that's not going to display my.mov in existing browsers > (unless they're farther along than I expected, but let's just use IE. It > certainly won't). BUT, the nice thing is, whatever's inside is fallback > content. So, > ... > <video src='my.mov'><object data='...'>...</object></video> > > This is what we mean by backwards compatibility. You're talking about graceful degradation. Backwards compatibility in this context refers to maintaining compatibility with existing components. Some examples of non-backwards compatible changes would be renaming an element like <script> to <handler>, or redefining the <label> element to be a list header, instead of a form control label. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 09:42:30 UTC