W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2006

[whatwg] WhatWG and <embed>

From: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@web.de>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 10:32:44 -0700
Message-ID: <44FDB4BC.3080105@web.de>
Shadow2531 wrote:
> However, see <http://shadow2531.com/opera/testcases/plugins/wmp/004.html>

I don't have a WMP plugin (or a Windows OS, at the moment), do you have 
maybe a flash testcase? Also: which version of Firefox did you test with?

> Either way, it works in Opera, but the difference is that with the
> latter, the plugin itself does the resolving.  If you actually want
> the plugin itself to do the resolving, and the plugin doesn't know
> codebase, I think you should be allowed to make things work.

I absolutely don't think this should be up to each implementor. And I 
don't think the spec should require it either. Where does this baseurl 
attribute come from anyway? I can't seem to find docs on it.

> It's the wmp netscape plugin and MS's documentation that's the
> problem, but they're never going to fix it, which is why I think it
> should be allowed to make things work even if it is the plug-ins
> fault.

Why are they never going to fix it? And why should the browser work 
around it?

> To sum things up, there needs to be a set or common way of making
> pain-in-the-butt plugins work, but again, I guess this is beyond the
> spec.

Why does there _need_ to be such a way?
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 2006 10:32:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:29 UTC