- From: Guillaume Ludwig <contact@gmli.fr>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:18:31 +0100
- To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>, public-html@w3.org
Dr. Olaf Hoffmann wrote: > I think, these problems show mainly, that the img element > of html is outdated since the object element was introduced. Perhaps, however "object" can't replace "img" from a semantic point of view. > Therefore the best approach would be to replace img by > image with the same functionality as object and doing > similar things concerning functionality with video and > audio to get the same approach as in SMIL - the naming > is only related to semantics, the authors thinks is right, > the functionality is always the same for all of them... Then, we'll have an "image" element, but what are the differences with the "img" element, only semantics ? (note: I prefer a image element than a img element) Guillaume -- Guillaume LUDWIG - GMLi
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 11:18:56 UTC