W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > October 1996

Re: W3C Object draft; ideological/semantic issue

From: Carl Morris <msftrncs@htcnet.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 14:38:17 -0500
Message-Id: <199610191945.OAA25810@inet.htcnet.com>
To: "Joined Trill" <hostmaster@trill-home.com>, "HTML Discussion List" <www-html@w3.org>
| From: Subir Grewal <grewals@acf2.NYU.EDU>
| To: HTML Discussion List <www-html@w3.org>
| Subject: W3C Object draft; ideological/semantic issue
| Date: Saturday, October 19, 1996 1:35 PM

| What I'm concerned about is that the examples as they stand
| such statements as "Your browser doesn't support java, get the
| latest-greatest-browser 54.36 beta NOW!".  Which is something we've
| considering here for a while as well.  I don't think we need to
| such statements.  Even something like "Some useful alternative text
| would be better than "Your client does not support java

Your concern is valid, but I think the reason is that OBJECT is to only
be used for content, if your JAVA applet isn't "content" (of which can
not usually be replaced with something less) then it probably doesn't
belong even when the browser can display it...  Weak point I know, it
becomes a content battle....  but sometimes I think that's the point
the W3C is trying to make.
Received on Saturday, 19 October 1996 15:38:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:20:26 UTC