W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2010

Re: CfC: Adopt ISSUE-105 canvas-usemap Change Proposal to add usemap attribute to the canvas element

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:59:09 -0700
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <BC78F9CF-26C8-42BE-9125-E2BCD1F1A929@apple.com>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>

On Jun 23, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> Since you think the proposal was a bad idea, there must be a counter proposal you can write that isn't a bad idea. Given that the proposal is "Add an attribute", (and assuming that it copies the sentence or so to give you complete explicit editing instructions to execute the proposal), I would expect a counter proposal that explains *why* it is a bad idea to document the existing behaviour of browsers in this way.

Are you saying that browsers actually do something when a usemap attribute is present on the canvas element? Which browsers? Do you have a test case?


Received on Thursday, 24 June 2010 04:59:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:20 UTC