- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:50:17 -0500 (EST)
- To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Yep, and this is why I gave an example that used the img element, (but at
least it is valid html) and even one that uesd embed, although that means you
have todecide whether you are going to break forwards or backwards
compatibility...
The good news is that object is implemented in a number of browsers. The
current (Macintosh) versions of all graphic browsers I have (IE, Mozilla,
iCab, Opera and Netscape) running support object, although IE has a bug in
the way it handles png images in object.
cheers
Charles
On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, David Woolley wrote:
> <object type="image/svg+xml" data="someSVGimage">
> <img src="plainPng" alt="examples can be dull" />
> <object>
Strictly this should be:
<object type="image/svg+xml" data="someSVGimage">
<object type="image/png" data="plainPng">
examples can be dull
</object>
<object>
however, the implementation of object is so poor, after all it has been
in the standard for only 4 years now, that the first one is safer.
As hinted at in Jon's question on www-svg, people are actually advised to
use the, proprietory, element "embed" for SVG, because of the poor object
implementations.
--
Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2001 18:50:21 UTC