Re: Deprecated or not?

Murray Altheim:

> Bertilo Wennergren wrote:

> > And in XHTML 1.1 <applet> seems to have been de-deprecated,
> > without any explanation. The specs say that all deprecated
> > elements in HTML 4 are gone - but <applet> is still there
> > as an element distinct from <object>.

> > And furthermore all the other deprecated elements are there
> > too! In an special module for "legacy elements". Weird!

> > I'm confused. Could anyone explain what's going on, or
> > point me to documents that can.

> Rather than simply reading the DTD, read the specification where
> this is *actually* explained:
> 
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/

Well, the various specs are what I did read at first, and that's where 
the question originated from. Reading the DTD just got me slightly
more confused.

> Section 4.19 describes the Legacy module,

Yes, the legacy module is sort of explained, though I still amazed
that it exists. My main problem is with <applet>.

> and <applet> is still included since <object> still doesn't work 
> correctly to support Java applets.

That's a good explanation. But shouldn't it be mentioned in the specs?

The XHTML 1.1 spec says:

  "With the advent of the XHTML modules defined in Modularization of 
  XHTML, the W3C has removed support for deprecated elements and attributes
  from the XHTML family."

I guess one could interpret "support for deprecated elements" as "support for 
SOME deprecated elements". I however read it as "support for ALL deprecated 
elements", as I suppose most people would. <applet> seems to be the one big 
exception, so it would seem appropriate to mention that somewhere.

To make things clear: I have nothing against the applet element. I just
want to understand the goings on.

======================================================================
                         Bertilo Wennergren
                     <bertilow@hem.passagen.se>
                  <http://purl.oclc.org/NET/bertilo>
======================================================================

Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2000 06:37:33 UTC