- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:11:55 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, public-html@w3.org
On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Mark Baker wrote: > > Consider the definition of iframe. I honestly don't know what part of > that section defines the meaning of the element. The paragraph that > defines "sandbox" seems to be the only DOM-independent text I can find > there, so that would be part of it. What about the rest (e.g. see the > HTML 4 definition)? HTML4: The IFRAME element allows authors to insert a frame within a block of text. Inserting an inline frame within a section of text is much like inserting an object via the OBJECT element: they both allow you to insert an HTML document in the middle of another, they may [sic] both be aligned with surrounding text, etc. HTML5: The iframe element introduces a new nested browsing context. HTML4: The information to be inserted inline is designated by the src attribute of this element. HTML5: The src attribute gives the address of a page that the nested browsing context is to contain. HTML4: The contents of the IFRAME element, on the other hand, should only be displayed by user agents that do not support frames or are configured not to display frames. HTML5: Descendants of iframe elements represent nothing. (In legacy user agents that do not support iframe elements, the contents would be parsed as markup that could act as fallback content.) I don't really understand what you mean by "DOM-independent". What implementation are you considering for which the current text is lacking? > I agree that this doesn't necessitate a split of the spec (though I'd > still prefer that happened). But I think the minimum required to > resolve the issue would be to split the definitions into two independent > sub-sections. I don't understand what the sections would be. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 24 November 2008 23:12:31 UTC