- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 01:04:24 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Robert Burns wrote: > > Without implementation problems > > <video> could just be > > <object data='video'> > fallback > </object > > <audio> could just be > > <object data='audio'> > fallback > </object > > <canvas> could just be > > <object type='image/canvas'> > fallback > </object Actually, no -- the <video>, <audio>, and <canvas> elements all expose elaborate APIs that are specific to the kind of media to which they relate. When those elements were introduced, it was thought unwise to overload <object> with all these APIs as well as APIs for frames, plugins, images, and the like. (Part of the reason <object> is so poorly implemented is that it is so overloaded with different behaviours, a lesson that I've tried to apply to all the new features in HTML5.) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2007 01:18:15 UTC