W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > June 2003

Re: Shorten <object> in XHTML 2.0?

From: (wrong string) äper <christoph.paeper@tu-clausthal.de>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 01:51:15 +0200
Message-ID: <04c001c33e99$547c5a60$3ef4ae8b@heim4.tuclausthal.de>
To: "Jason M. Kikta" <kiktajm@muohio.edu>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>

Jason M. Kikta <kiktajm@muohio.edu>:
>
> I think you misunderstood what I was saying (or I didn't present it
> well, which is more likely).

No, but I think you misunderstood me!

> It is important to break backwards compatibility in this case, because
> of an existing bug.

In a browser that doesn't support XHTML2 nor ever will in its current
version.

> <object data="test.png">
> <object data="test.jpg">
> <img src="test.gif" alt="Test Picture" />
> </object>
> </object>

In XHTML2 that should IMO be something like

  <object data="test"
   type="image/png, image/jpg;q=0.9, image/gif;q=0.8">
   Test
  </object>

combined with server-side content negotiation.
A browser should use the 'type' attribute to build its Accept header for
this resource.

> The problem is idiot browsers like IE,
> that can't render it properly but think that they can.

Yes, that's true for 'object' in HTML4.

There's a quote from Goethe that applies, but I don't dare to translate it
to English:
»Toren und gescheite Leute sind gleich unschädlich.
 Nur die Halbnarren und die Halbweisen, das sind die Gefährlichen.«

> Switching to <obj> would solve this problem, since IE would go to the
> <img> tag, and you would still have valid XHTML 2.

The 'img' element will not be in XHTML2.
Received on Sunday, 29 June 2003 19:51:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT