W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 1998

Re: EMBED

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@tux.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 09:51:31 -0500 (EST)
To: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>
cc: WAI Markup Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9812070948300.28529-100000@tux.w3.org>
That's about the size of it. I think it will be used a lot (EMBED is used
a lot) for movies and audio to be included within a page instead of
seperately - it's one of those things that I suspect designers are VERY
reluctant to give up. So I think that offering a good kludge which
provides an accessible result is better than leaving people to do as they
will.

Actually it would be worth suggesting that they also include a link to the
object in the standard (A HREF) way.

Charles McCthieNevile

On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Jason White wrote:

> Thus, Charles' proposed kludge amounts to the following:
> 
> <object data="symphony.au"> Mahler's first symphony <embed [attribute
> referring to symphony.au]> </object>
> 
> Whereas, a standard-compliant solution would use an anchor element instead
> of EMBED: <a href="symphony.au"> Listen to Mahler's first symphony </a>
> within the content of OBJECT. Of course, some functionality is lost, but
> the result is not overly inconvenient for the reader and maintains
> conformity with the HTML specification.
> 
> The legacy will, of course, disappear as users upgrade their software.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 7 December 1998 09:51:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:46:58 GMT