- From: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:41:19 +0200 (CEST)
- To: www-html@w3.org
On 31 Mar, Shane McCarron wrote:
> I suspect I have exacerbated the problem here by using a poor example.
It was, actually, an excellent example.
> The intent of a universal @src is not really so you end up duplicating
> fallback content for paragraphs. Obviously you *could* do this, but
> just because you *can* do a thing does not mean you *should* do a
> thing.
Indeed. However, that doesn't change the fact that by running very
much amok with the generalisation - and I /would/ argue it - the
option is given, and will be misused.
> nor sufficiently semantically rich. By exposing these attributes and
> their behavior everywhere, the content author can have very fine
> grained control over what gets delivered.
It's a good, if misdirected, intent. The problem is the "everywhere"
and the "fine grained" control.
I predict the SRC option in XHTML 2 will be used for two things:
templates - ie. <div src="footer.html"> where 'footer.html' contain a
section of markup - and frame replacements.
The intent to simply make it possible to replace, say, graphical
elements with rich alternative content won't prevent this.
> And, just to be clear, this is NOT frames. It is more like IMG with
> fallback behavior. If you want to see the future of frames, check out
Again, I must disagree. Regardless of the xframes spec, when an author
can toss two DIVs with associated SRC and STYLE attributes, adding in
fixed positioning and overflow, onto a page and get what looks like
frames ... then authors WILL do it.
I'll wager you a pint of ale. Already, today, we are being asked "how
can I use CSS to create frames?" and the answer "you can mimic the
layout, but not the functionality" is not appreciated. In the future
you can do both - and I'll be positively shocked if that wasn't
exactly what happens.
Yes, my view /is/ that we shouldn't provide mechanisms that we can
reasonably expect will be misused. SRC is such a mechanism. In all
cases, except for actual object replacement, what SRC do can be better
done server-side.
It's a solution looking for a problem. Much kudos to the WG for
listening to the i18n/accessiblity crowd, but this isn't going to
improve anything.
--
- Tina Holmboe Greytower Technologies
tina@greytower.net http://www.greytower.net
+46 708 557 905
Received on Saturday, 31 March 2007 16:41:28 UTC