- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 10:12:17 +0200
- To: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- CC: Dave Hodder <dmh@dmh.org.uk>, www-html-editor@w3.org
Laurens Holst wrote: > I think XHTML 2.0 should allow alt="..." as an alternative to enclosed > alternate text. It could be used until content inside an element is > sufficiently supported by all major browsers. I think that would mean that you take the ugly bits of HTML 4.01 forward into XHTML 2.0. IMG was supposed to be replaced by OBJECT back then as IMG is not really backwards compatible. Browsers have to recognize the element in order to view its fallback content. Having IMG at all in XHTML 2.0 strikes me as odd and I wonder what kind of consensus was agreed upon to include it... -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Saturday, 4 June 2005 08:12:14 UTC