Re: Deprecation in HTML 4.0

Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor (roconnor@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca)
Fri, 11 Jul 1997 10:45:13 -0400 (EDT)


Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 10:45:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor" <roconnor@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>
To: "Chapman, Hass" <hass.chapman@sebank.se>
cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: RE: Deprecation in HTML 4.0
In-Reply-To: <199707110620.IAA21943@se2000.sebank.se>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95q.970711104412.16545B-100000@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>

On Fri, 11 Jul 1997, Chapman, Hass wrote:

>  ----------
> >From: "Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor" (reply to: 
> >roconnor@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca)
> >This sounds like very good reasoning to me, but I get the impression that
> >some elements are not being deprecated because they are ``popular''.
> >(e.g. IMG, B, I, TT, <A NAME="foo">)  This seems like a very silly reason
> >not to deprecate elements (or attributes).  The specs wouldn't force
> >authors not to use theses elements.  It is a suggestion.  I think most
> >people here would agree that the above list of elements (and attributes)
> >shouldn't be used in pure HTML 4.0. (HTML 4.0 strict?)
> 
> Why shouldn't IMG be used?

IMG shouldn't be used because, like APPLET, it has been replaced by the
OBJECT element.

-- 
Russell O'Connor            |              roconnor@uwaterloo.ca
        <http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/%7Eroconnor/>
"And truth irreversibly destroys the meaning of its own message"
-- Anindita Dutta, "The Paradox of Truth, the Truth of Entropy"