- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 17:43:05 -0800
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org> >> wrote: >> > In the absence of compelling use cases, I'd just leave it at <img>, >> > <canvas> >> > and <video> and whitelist in more elements later if necessary. >> >> <input type=image>? ?<object>/<embed> seem to have roughly equivalent >> use-cases to <video> (though perhaps we just want to encourage >> <video>). > > <object> can contain fallback content which might get tricky. Also, plugin > objects don't have a useful intrinsic size. > > Why would anyone use <input type="image"> instead of <img>? I don't think they would. I'm just saying, it's equivalent in rendering behavior to <img>. I'm okay with restricting it to the big 3, I'm just exploring the problem space first. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 17:43:05 UTC