Re: a bad idea (fwd)

Benjamin Franz (snowhare@netimages.com)
Mon, 15 Jul 1996 16:31:02 -0700 (PDT)


Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 16:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>
To: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com>
cc: Walter Ian Kaye <boo@best.com>, www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: a bad idea (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.93.960715145019.9821J-100000@fully.organic.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960715162450.1878A-100000@ns.viet.net>

On Mon, 15 Jul 1996, Brian Behlendorf wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Jul 1996, Benjamin Franz wrote:
> 
> Ah, then I'm not quite sure why you'd be suggesting IMG as a container tag
> if the only thing it could contain is other tags - I see a very limited
> usefulness of that, and a large potential for people to get it wrong...

It would provide the ability to add multiple 'alternate URLs' cleanly.
Otherwise you are going to get a hack like this:

<IMG SRC="blah" ALTSRC="blah1%%blah2%%blah3%%blah4">

This is because
<IMG SRC="blah ALTSRC="blah1" ALTSRC="BLAH2" ALTSRC="BLAH3"> is impossible
to express in SGML.

> what would that provide now that we have OBJECT?

Backward compatible extension of IMG for multiple server or mirroring
support. OBJECT can't do that AFAIK (although it would be a good idea for 
it, too).

-- 
Benjamin Franz