- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:44:40 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > Quoting Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch>: > > Basically I envisage having <embed> being for plugins, <img> being for > > bitmap images, and <iframe> being for nested browser views, with <object> > > being an element that autodetects whether to use a plugin, display a > > bitmap image, or act as a nested browser view based on the content. (For > > historical reasons, of course, the elements don't exactly fit this mold, > > but it's close enough IMHO.) > > I think having <embed> only for plugins doesn't scale. It also doesn't > reflect implementations as they have to support it for SVG for example > which some support natively. Right, as I said, for historical reasons the elements don't exactly match that. However the basic principle is as I described; the exceptions are all "logical" extensions to that (e.g. "plugins" can be browser-native). -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 26 April 2006 07:44:40 UTC