- From: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:56:05 -0400
- To: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
- Message-Id: <47FF3A49-4FAA-4865-9C55-E236E5F2B9E4@gmail.com>
Current browsers ignore tags they don't understand. That's why <canvas>, <video> and <audio> are considered practical in terms of fallback. - Elliott Sprehn On Apr 19, 2007, at 1:28 PM, Jeff Schiller wrote: > > Brad, > > Thanks. > > I see that Canvas has the ability to provide fallback content [1] > like: > > <canvas><img src="sorry.png"/></canvas> > > I just wanted to verify that existing user agents (IE included) would > parse the <img/> if they didn't understand what <canvas/> means. > Someone probably can give me a Yes/No answer there. > > I notice <video> says the same thing, though I think there is a > slightly incorrect statement in [2]. Shouldn't > > "Content may be provided inside the video element so that older Web > browsers, which do not support video, can display text to the user > informing them of how to access the video contents. User agents should > not show this fallback content to the user." > > be > > "Content may be provided inside the video element so that older Web > browsers, which do not support video, can display text to the user > informing them of how to access the video contents. User agents that > support the <video> element should not show this fallback content to > the user." > > I think the fallback content mechanism within WHATWG HTML5 makes > perfect sense as long as older user agents would automatically display > the fallback content (which I'm assuming that has already been > verified given the overall philosphy of the WHATWG HTML5 document). > Given that, I don't see <switch> as necessary. > > Regards, > Jeff > > [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ > section-the-canvas.html#the-canvas > [2] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ > section-video.html#video > > On 4/19/07, Brad Fults <bfults@neatbox.com> wrote: >> Section 2.3.3 of the Web Apps 1.0 draft [1] seems to indicate that >> DOM3 Core's feature strings [2], including getFeature() and >> isSupported(0, will be relied upon for such things. >> >> [1] - http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ >> section-common.html#dom-feature >> [2] - http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Core/core.html#DOMFeatures >> >> >> -- >> Brad Fults >> >
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2007 18:56:13 UTC