W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2006

[whatwg] WhatWG and <embed>

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:39:30 -0500
Message-ID: <44EA1A02.4090207@mit.edu>
Shadow2531 wrote:
> I'd like to see the steps spelled out *exactly* because HTML 4.01 does
> not do that.

Yes.  That's what this thread is all about.

> If classid and data are both present, Firefox ignores the data and
> gives the classid a shot. If there's no activex plug-in installed that
> handles the clsid, Firefox fails and goes to alternate content.

You mean "type", not "data", right?  And actually, all non-java classids just 
make Firefox show the alternate content, unless you have the optional ActiveX 
stuff installed.

> It looks like you're saying that people that target the activeX method
> don't want to fall back on the NPAPI method.  But, what if an author
> wants to?  You'd probably say to use alternate content and another
> object tag or embed tag.

Yep. That's the whole point of <object> having alternate content.

> However, I think it'd be neat to fall back (or give the option through
> an attribute or something to fall back ) on the data off the current
> object element.

Why reinvent the wheel?  There is already a way of doing fallback with <object>.

> Opera doesn't do classid stuff (except for java) so it can ignore the
> classid and use data.

In my opinion, this is a bug in Opera; one they introduced to be more compatible 
with IE in many cases (and that breaks other cases, sometimes badly).

Received on Monday, 21 August 2006 13:39:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:28 UTC