W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-comments@w3.org > April to June 2008

More clarifications on object processing

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 19:04:31 +0200
To: public-bpwg-comments <public-bpwg-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1213203871.6545.1.camel@localhost>


While implementing the new last call version of mobileOK, I found a few
places where the processing of the objects could be clarified:
* when analyzing external resources (in ContentFormatSupport,
PageSizeLimit, ExternalResources), the objects and images that are set
as fallback of an object that is in an acceptable format shouldn't be
counted. For instance,
<object data="myimage.gif"><img src="myimage.png" alt=""/></object>
shouldn't trigger an error in ContentFormatSupport, the weight of
myimage.png shouldn't be counted in PageSizeLimit and ExternalResources
* similarly, I don't think we want to raise a ContentFormatSupport error
on <object data="myimage.png"><img src="myimage.gif" alt="" /></object>
since this is using correctly the fallback mechanism; while this gets
accepted by ObjectsOrScript, this would currently raise an error in the
way I read ContentFormatSupport; 
* I don't think "myimage.gif" should be counted as external
resources/page size limit in the following instance:
<object data="myimage.gif" type="image/png">Hello</object> - the current
text says to "include those objects whose content type is either
"image/jpeg" or "image/gif" irrespective of whether the type attribute
is specified.", but it's not clear why.
* if I hit an HTTP redirect, does the size of the page served as the
redirect page counts in PAGE_SIZE_LIMIT-1 or only
under ´╗┐PAGE_SIZE_LIMIT-2? I've implemented the latter since I find it
less confusing, but the spec could be clearer about it

Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2008 17:05:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:09:09 UTC