W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2010

[whatwg] <INCLUDE> and links with @rel=embed

From: bjartur <svartman95@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 11:11:08 +0000
Message-ID: <4bf275d3.8995d80a.52e1.fffff237@mx.google.com>
--------

This is yet another proposal to replace <video>, <audio>, <model> etc with a single element: <include>.
Example says more than a hundred words:
<include>
	<a rel="alternate embed" src="./video" type="video/mpeg" media="visual" title="[insert title here]">A video recording of the conference</a>
	<a rel="alternate embed" src="./audio" type="audio/speex" media="aural" title="An informational title...">A sound recording of the conference</a>
</include>
Change @rel=embed to some better name if you want and correct the media query which may be wrong but you should get the general idea.
This seems backwards compatible and I'd argue that it's more semantic, even to unsupporting browsers, than wrapping it up in Flash (though authors can add an <object> after the <a>s if they want).
Also it's possible to group elements similiar to alternate stylesheets with the same title, or by nesting <includes>. We just have to standardize on either one.
<include>
	<a rel="alternate embed" src="./video+audio" type="video/x-matroska" ...>...</a>
	<include rel="alternate" title="Seperate tracks if you can't open matroskas"> <!-- Either mark the include as alternate or make all elements inside an <include> alternatives -->
		<a rel="embed" href="./video" ...>Video track</a>
		<a rel="embed" href="./audio" ...>Audio track</a>
	</include>
</include>

And some quotes from Tim Berners-Lee who thought of the issue of <audio>, <IMG> and <video> in '93.

timbl:
>I had imagined that figues would be reprented as
>
><a name=fig1 href="fghjkdfghj" REL="EMBED, PRESENT">Figure </a>
>
>where the relation ship values mean
>
>EMBED	 Embed this here when presenting it
>PRESENT	 Present this whenever the source document is presented
>Note that you can have various combinations of these, and if the browser doesn???t support either one, it doesn???t break.
I'm not quite sure how PRESENT is useful, though.

timbl:
>Let the IMG tag be INCLUDE and let it refer to an arbitrary document type. Or EMBED if INCLUDE sounds like a cpp include which people will expect to provide SGML source code to be parsed inline ??? not what was intended.
s/IMG/video and audio/
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2010 04:11:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:23 UTC