- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:00:55 +0100
- To: "Rob Sayre" <rsayre@mozilla.com>, "John Foliot - WATS.ca" <foliot@wats.ca>
- Cc: "'Geoffrey Sneddon'" <foolistbar@googlemail.com>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'W3C WAI-XTECH'" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:18:55 +0100, Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com> wrote: > On 2/21/09 1:56 PM, John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote: >> Maybe my suggestion of changing 'should' to 'must' is too simplistic - >> what >> do I know? But until such time as this fundamental issue is resolved, >> <canvas> now has a pall cast upon it that will continue to haunt it. >> So fix >> it now, or deal with it later. > > Change 'should' to 'must'. Hmm. I we made that change, which of the > following examples would conform? > > 1.) <canvas></canvas> > > 2.) <canvas> </canvas> > > 3.) <canvas> </canvas> > > 4.) <canvas>fallback</canvas> > > 5.) <canvas><section hidden>fallback</section></canvas> It depends on what the <canvas> represents, just like with fallback for <img> and <object>. It's not machine-checkable. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Monday, 23 February 2009 12:01:57 UTC