W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > July 2004

Re: Why the "Embedding" attribute set? Why not just use "object"?

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@iinet.net.au>
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 10:47:54 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <41027643.9020002@iinet.net.au>
To: Paul Crowley <ciphergoth@gmail.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org




[This should be in www-html, rather than www-html-editor since it's not 
really an issue.  It's more general discussion, so I've changed the 
recipient to be www-html@w3.org]

Paul Crowley wrote:
> I can't work out what it is that including the "Embedding" attributes
> in the common attribute set offers that the "object" tag can't already
> do in a neater and more general way - I'd appreciate a pointer to the
> discussion that led to this decision.
> 
> I tried to check the comment archive to see if this question was
> already answered, but the large amount of archived spam made this
> impossible...

The embedding attribute collection allows *any* element to be an object 
such as an image, and therefore, more accurately represent the semantics 
of the content.

eg.
<h src="/images/heading" type="image/png,image/gif">Heading</h>

which is better than having to do

<h><object data="/images/heading" 
type="image/png,image/gif">Heading</object></h>

or if you really want pixel perfection in all graphical browsers, then:
<html ... src="screenshot" type="image/png,image/gif">
     <head>...</head>
     <body>...</body>
</html>

But I don't recommed that. :-)

read through the examples in the spec [1], there are a few good ones in 
there, that should explain a lot more than I have.

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xhtml2-20040722/mod-embedding.html#s_embeddingmodule
-- 
Lachlan Hunt

http://www.lachy.id.au/
lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au
Received on Sunday, 25 July 2004 23:27:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:00 GMT