- From: Lee Roberts <pentagon@starband.net>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 12:25:04 -0500 (EST)
- To: www-html@w3.org
Dan, Strange how you seem to think that the question of Flash inclusion is incorrect in placing in this forum. Obviously you miss the entire point of the initial question. The young man wanted assistance on how to correctly (within the standards include Flash). The question can be ported to any <object>/<embed> situation including PNG, Shockwave or anything else that until the <embed> element was removed met compliancy. I have the same problem. Regardless of how it is done and what DTD is used the <embed> fails because it is no longer supported. However, all the earlier NN browsers and those using the NN plug-in format require <embed> versus <object>. It makes no sense as to why the <embed> was removed while the Consortium knew it was still being used by NN. Your issues, lacking a concern for compliancy, are strange indeed. Obviously there are some fashionable words and phrases that could be used to discribe the situation more colorfully, but that would not be professional. Now that we have the issues in the clear and that this is a place to discuss the formalities of the HTML language, I'll do just that. Why was the <embed> element removed? Who failed to see the implications of doing such? Was it a factor that either MM or NN was not cared for and therefore designing pages to meet NN would be incorrect. Or was it that those changes were done to remove alternate media content from the approved HTML structures? Now, I'm quite clear that my question lies only in the why and what of the HTML approved codes. Certainly, this is the format to answer my question. Now, I'll add one more point. What is the approved work around since the <embed> element is not used? Thanks, Lee Roberts an old ARPAnet programmer
Received on Sunday, 13 January 2002 23:12:36 UTC