- From: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:02:37 -0800
- To: "Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, <public-html@w3.org>
> Yes, you are off. @declare is a boolean attribute in HTML4. sorry to go off topic. No wonder it never worked as I expected. rereading I see I had recalled id wrong. id was the ref when you wanted to turn it on. Dropping declare should make it run if complete enough to run, otherwise fallback. Two other ways were shown in the standard http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#h-13.3.4 The first example instantiated the object by href in an <a>. The object should appear when clicked, I think. The second example used the declare to carry some common parameters, then instantiate a version with special parameters for content. Maybe nice keystroke saver if many mostly common objects. Will more than one instance work? I never found out. Did either of those 13.3.4 Object declarations and instantiations examples ever work anywhere? I tried them both jun 23 1998 and never got to follow up. > There should be no reason to doubt that the OBJECT in this example > would render if @declare was removed. Right. Of course, but then the instance requested in the <a> would never appear? Or would the <a> work and <object> be available both places? With no declare, I think the <a> should fail (do nothing because no valid href target). Same in second example. If you undeclare what I might call sort of the object prototype, then it, or its fallback if not enough info, should likely appear, and the instance(s) may fallback due to lack of some info or otherwise. Me not know:) However, it is an interesting example of how <object> could work and pass parameters. Also shows param with three attrs. <PARAM name="font" valuetype="object" value="#tribune"> I think it would be the wrong reason to drop @datatype and @type from <param> if it was thought to be only used with declare. The default is "string" and is there any use to providing the valuetype="ref" option in <param>? REF specifies that the string should be treated as a URI. Plugins use <param> to hold resource URL but always that I have seen as just a string. Is being able to interpret @value as a URI rather than a string important now? If so, then is @type in <param> usable? Thanks Again, Joe
Received on Saturday, 30 January 2010 03:03:16 UTC