- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 06:54:29 -0500 (EST)
- To: Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>
- cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, WAI IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
www-svg removed - I think they know this. Yes, Vadim, you are wrong here ;-) It is possible to inlude virtually anything via img element, although most browsers do not suport using it for formats they cannot handle natively (no surprise) and most browseers do not support using it for HTML content (I never worked outn exactly why. It isn't normal, but there is no reason why it shouldn't have been done). Amaya, which does support SVG natively, has no problems with it. For other browsers which can handle it via a plugin or helper (e.g. Lynx) it depends on whether you have anything confiugred to handle that type of content. But for all included content object is a better design (still not perfect) and should be supported too. Cheers Charles On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Vadim Plessky wrote: yes, but most people (even non-English speaking) understand quite well what is <IMG src="foo.gif"> about. And there is a problem with transition to SVG, as you can't use constructs as <IMG src="foo.svg"> Please correct me if I am wrong.
Received on Friday, 21 December 2001 06:54:32 UTC