- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 21:34:05 -0800
On Dec 1, 2010, at 5:37 PM, Robert O'Callahan 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. So can <video>. It's a shame to disallow HTML elements with known width and height, e.g. if you want to render a small disconnected <div> subtree into a <canvas> or map it onto a WebGL texture. You'd have to decide how to resolve style (maybe assume it's a child of the body?). Simon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20101201/cb08aa9e/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 21:34:05 UTC