- From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 15:58:24 -0500
- To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "public-html WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 04:07:15 -0500, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Michael A. Puls II wrote: >> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 02:07:26 -0500, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >> > On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Michael A. Puls II wrote: >> > > >> > > However, I still like the idea of explicitly specifying full markup >> > > for the embedded doc like you can with src="data:". I also like >> > > being able to do src="data:application/xml," in text/html pages. >> > >> > The doc="" idea certainly wouldn't preclude using data: URIs with >> > src="". >> >> Understood. It just seems like @doc should/could have *almost* the same >> capabilities. > > One of the main reasons for considering doc="" is making it simple, so I > don't know if we really want to add too much power here (there's usually > a > direct correlation between power and complexity, and an inverse > correlation between power and ease of use). Unless there's really a > strong > use case, I'd rather leave the less common cases to the existing data: > mechanism, which has been shown to work (albeit with the corresponding > loss of ease of use). OK, cool. -- Michael
Received on Sunday, 17 January 2010 20:58:58 UTC