W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2008

Re: HTML5 object element - classid or not classid?

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:50:42 -0400
Message-ID: <48976BA2.5000301@mit.edu>
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
CC: public-html@w3.org

Dr. Olaf Hoffmann wrote:
> It is simply the referenced section of the draft:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#the-object
> No, I think this part explains the functionality of the attributes too,
> because this part contains the definitions of the attributes too.

Yeah, indeed.  Sounds like some clarification is needed here in terms of 
which parts are document conformance and which parts are UA conformance.

> And if there is no definition of 'classid' this makes no sense for
> new implementors too, if they do not know, what it is.

They don't need to know what it "is" as long as they know what to do 
with it.  The spec should clearly specify what to do with it, of course.

> Well, then it is missing in the object section what to do if a 'declare' 
> attribute is present or a 'schubidu' attribute.

Nothing special would be the default, no?

> If 'classid' is assumed
> to be outdated nonsense, there is no need to mention it at all, 
> especially not without a defintion, what it is.

There's lots of "outdated nonsense" which conforming documents are not 
allowed to include, but which UAs still have to handle and hence the 
spec needs to specify handling for.  That's all the spec needs to do 
with it, though.

> For whatever purpose, but currently I did not find a definition in HTML5
> and because it is mentioned in the object element definition section,
> authors may want to use it.

I agree that it should be made clearer that a document that uses it is 
non-conforming (assuming that's the intent, of course).

>> Probably because no one actually implements it?
> Why not? 

Sorry, I can't read minds very well.  Especially when there is temporal 
separation involved.  You'll have to ask the implementors from 10 years 
ago or so.

Received on Monday, 4 August 2008 20:51:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:36 UTC