- From: Charles (Chuck) Oppermann <chuckop@MICROSOFT.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 15:03:24 -0700
- To: "'nir.dagan@econ.upf.es'" <nir.dagan@econ.upf.es>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
I disagree that PARAM is the best place. The whole idea of LONGDESC was because ALT, while allowing very long strings, does not allow markup. The inner text of <OBJECT> allows for markup. Also, how will the user agent "know" to read the PARAM? Most <OBJECT>'s have multiple PARAMs. Seems very clear to me that the designers of HTML knew that the best place for additional information about the <OBJECT>. The HTML 4.0 specification says: "One significant consequence of the OBJECT element's design is that it offers a mechanism for specifying alternate object renderings; each embedded OBJECT declaration may specify alternate content types." I say that the markup is the best place for that information. -----Original Message----- From: nir.dagan@econ.upf.es [mailto:nir.dagan@econ.upf.es] Sent: Thursday, July 30, 1998 6:23 PM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: Long descriptions in <OBJECT> I agree that PARAM is the best way to mark longdesc in OBJECT. The philosiphy of the PARAM element is to be able to include attributes to OBJECT. However since new object types may require different attributes, by using PARAM rather than attributes to OBJECT one wouldn't need to change the HTML specs whenever a new object type is born. Althogh longdesc may be considered generic, and not object-type dependent the absence of longdesc as an attribute justifies using the PARAM mechanism. Being somewhat pedantic, concerning an example previously on this mailing list, PARAM elements must come before any other content of the OBJECT. Regards, Nir Dagan Assistant Professor of Economics Universitat Pompeu Fabra Barcelona (Spain) email: dagan@upf.es Website: http://www.econ.upf.es/%7Edagan/
Received on Thursday, 30 July 1998 18:04:16 UTC