- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:11:42 +1100
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Cc: whatwg@whatwg.org
On 15/11/2012, at 3:15 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote: > On 14/11/2012 00:04 , Mark Nottingham wrote: >> On 14/11/2012, at 4:37 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >>> (For what it's worth, inclusion in HTML is done using <iframe seamless>.) >> >> Ah. Does that work with older browsers (from the 2005 era onwards)? > > Nope. But if you want something that's future-enabled you could transition your library into being a shim for seamless iframes. > > That involves more than inclusion though (see http://benvinegar.github.com/seamless-talk/) so you should probably double-check that seamless is what your use case calls for. Thanks, Robin - very helpful. The upside of the seamless approach seems to be that it does the right thing WRT the included content's type, etc. (as Ian mentioned). However, making it work in older browsers looks a lot more involved. Turning my library into a shim for seamless would require code both in the including context and included content, AIUI. If there's interest in specifying an 'include' tag, I'd be willing to do the work (spec and code), but otherwise it sounds like leaving things as-is is the right thing to do. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 00:12:53 UTC