- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:50:18 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8038 --- Comment #7 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2009-10-26 16:50:18 --- (In reply to comment #4) Since you ask me to repeat myself: Regarding <span>, <img> and "work exactly like". <span>: In legacy text/html user agents <source> should have worked exactly like <span>. In reality, <source /> will – unlike <span /> and unlike common belief [*] – get closed in Internet Explorer. Whereas </source> works as expected all over. <img>: <img> is a void element, like <source>. "work exactly like" - AUTHORS: Authors should be able to take advantage of the common knowledge that, in legacy user agents, <unknownelement> gets closed by </unknownelement>. Thus they should be permitted to use </source>, so as to avoid additional hacks just to close the element and to avoid that authors avoid using <source> (or even <video> itself) due to lack of support for <source> as a void element. "work exactly like" - SYNTAX: for new void elements, the syntax should work exactly like in XML/XHTML. Meaning: <source></source> should be a permitted syntax. "work exactly like" - LEGACY USER AGENTS: No one govern how legacy user agents react to the void <source> or <source />. Some legacy user agents vendors claims to support <video> and have offered demos of the support. Most of these demos never seem to include <source>. September 2008 you demoed support for <video> in a Firefox nightly. http://www.whatwg.org/demos/2008-sept/ You emphasized in your speech that you did not want to talk in future tense. Still there were no support for <source> in that demo. You spoke as if you tested a user agent that supported <video> (despite that you, in this bug report, try to make support for <source> and <video> synonymous things). (There are, btw, several instances of "<video />" on the web, and the do not everytime appear in a XHTML serialization ...) "work exactly like" - for NEW USER AGENTS: New user agents should support <source> as a void element. They should react the same whether the code is written <source>, <source /> or <source></source>. And current Safari release as well as the latest betas of Firefox 3.6 already do behave like that. (Opera 10.10 beta introduces support for <source> but doesn't yet treat <source>xyz</source> like <source />xyz.) [*] Your own comment about the effect of document.createElement() in IE was: "This piece of information makes building an HTML5 compatibility shim for IE7 far easier than had previously been assumed." http://ln.hixie.ch/?count=1&start=1201080691 However, the effect of "/>" in that context, was not discussed then, AFAIK. The effect will be that authors can handle IE6, IE7 and IE8 even more simply. While the rest of the flock will be left to hacks - or simply be forgottten. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 26 October 2009 16:50:22 UTC