- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:02:49 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
j.j. wrote: > "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> hodd gsachd: > > Therefore the best approach would be to replace img by > > image > > This isn't possible. All mayor web browsers implemented <image> the > same way as <img> since ages. Therefore <picture> or similar was > proposed on this list. Search the archive. > > j.j. It was never specified in html, but for example in SVG, therefore it cannot be a problem to specify it now in a more useful way in (X)HTML. If used before for whatever reason, obviously this was never a relyable use, just an error or nonsense without using another namespace ... An I think it is a waste of time to care about any maybe existing nonsense around, assuming that anyone really believes, that there is a defined display for any nonsense ;o)
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 12:07:07 UTC