W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2005

[whatwg] Test suite: Embedded content

From: Simon Pieters <zcorpan@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:14:57 +0000
Message-ID: <BAY109-F6C15AF8578B6B2E3C806DB4480@phx.gbl>

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
>I think for <img> you want to only support image/* types (e.g. not
>text/plain or text/html, not sure about image/svg+xml either, since there
>is no difference between that and application/xhtml+xml); and you want to
>only show them for 200 (or 301-200).

What about <img> only supporting raster images? If authors want vector 
images then they could use <object> instead.

>For <iframe> you want to support all
>types, and you want to show the contents for all the response codes, but
>they should show inside the frame regardless of the type.

Ok, fixed.

>For <embed> you
>want to show only things that require plugins, and only if they have 200
>(or 301-200) responses.

Interestingly enough though, Firefox 1.6a1 displays the PNG images from 
<embed> natively (not via a plugin). Further more, a "plugin" is probably UA 
dependent; some UAs require a plugin for a particular format while another 
UA supports it natively (e.g. IE has a plugin for MathML while Mozilla 
supports it natively).

How should <noembed> work? (If at all, I actually dislike all <no*> element 

>For <object> you want to show any type, and they
>should show without the frame if they are image or plugin data, and with
>the frame if they are not, but should only show for 200 and 301-200; other
>codes should cause the fallback content to show.


>I doubt HTML5 will have <applet>.

Then I won't go though the hassle. :)

>BTW it is spelt "response".

Thanks. Fixed.

Simon Pieters
Received on Monday, 28 November 2005 14:14:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:43 UTC