W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Preload for <section>

From: C.Bottelier <c.bottelier@ITsec.nl>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 10:11:48 +0200
Message-ID: <3D9412C4.4C58B985@ITsec.nl>
To: Micho <MichoKest@terra.es>
CC: www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

rote:
> More functionality can never affect backwardly the XHTML 2.0 standard,
Agreed

> and the pre-load proposal is both easy to implement and to code,
Agreed

> so why not do it? It is not a required argument, and if used it's very
> simple and clear.
This would not be a valid motivation to add it.

> Bad design? If somebody doesn't like this functionality, don't use it,
> but make it a part of the new standard because preloading _is_ important.
The question was if the pre-load attribute was only needed to hide
the effects of bad page design, or as a valid addition to the
functionallity of XHTML, without making XHTML heavyweigth as docbook is.

> As for Flash, I also dislike it's poor compatibility, but that is quite
> off-topic, I only posted it for the example.

Agreed

Christian Bottelier
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 04:12:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:16 GMT