- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 23:37:51 +0300
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Cc: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, aurélien levy <aurelien.levy@free.fr>, public-html@w3.org
On Jul 1, 2007, at 23:05, Robert Burns wrote: > * Not adding <embed> as an author conforming element (rather just > specify UA conforming algorithms for <embed> including adding @alt > and @longdesc support). Recommend the use of <object><param/ > >ffallback content</object> in the short-term with some other > simpler solution in the long-term if we think that's necessary. > - pro: already supported > - pro: provides a mechanism for fallback content that should be > provided and encouraged by the WG (a fallback mechanism that's much > simpler than <noembed>) > - con: may be more complicated to author than <embed> for IE (I'm > not sure if it is, but I could use some help in thinking of a con) con: According to http://weblogs.macromedia.com/accessibility/archives/ 2005/08/in_search_of_a.cfm Flash embedding methods that don't use <embed> have worse real-world behavior with AT than the Flish default embedding markup that uses <embed>. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Sunday, 1 July 2007 20:38:11 UTC