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

Re: //head/object

From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 15:55:36 +0100
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20100503155536.14f98de9@miranda.g5n.co.uk>
On Mon, 3 May 2010 12:01:38 +0200
Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:

> Use case?

I was thinking of using <object> in <head> as a way of embedding RDFa
or microdata without disturbing the appearance of the page.

While RDFa can encode graphs and deep trees in a flat sequence of
<link> or <meta> tags, it can be made more pithy by wrapping some
elements within other elements - <object> and <param> seemed perfect

For microdata on the other hand, without <object> it seems completely
impossible to embed data in the <head> in HTML.

And Maceij wrote:

> Assuming you accept the explanation that others have given (that  
> <object> implicitly closes the <head> and starts the <body> in most  
> browsers), could you please file a bug against the diffs document to  
> mention this difference?
> Bug filing URL:
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=HTML%20WG

In most browsers as measured by counting the number of vendors perhaps,
but in most browsers as measured by counting the number of users it
seems not.

Filing a bug against html5-diffs seems to beg the bigger question of
whether <object> should be allowed inside <head>. I can't find any
record of this having been discussed - the HTML5 draft spec seems to
have just accepted the behaviour of Opera, Gecko and WebKit, even
though it goes against the HTML 4 specification, and against Internet
Explorer's behaviour.

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but before filing a bug, I
think we need to discuss whether that bug should be against html5-diffs
or against html5.

Toby A Inkster
Received on Monday, 3 May 2010 14:57:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:02 UTC