- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:15:46 +0100
- To: Edward Lass <elass@goer.state.ny.us>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Edward Lass wrote: > Adeel's proposed use really wouldn't require a unique element. Like > Johannes said, it's something like XInclude. [2] Or OBJECT. (Since I do not think it is about including XML fragments, is it?) > You know, it's interesting how often this sort of question comes up * > either embedding document fragments or embedding entire documents into > (X)HTML. Sometimes it's seen as other types of includes [3] [4] and > sometimes it's discussed as a replacement for frames [5]. Again, OBJECT is suited as replacement for frames. > In Adeel's use case, however, there are some security and intellectual > property concerns. Client-side embedding of fragments from different > sites could make life a little too easy for phishers. Isn't that already possible using the IFRAME, FRAME or OBJECT element? -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 16:16:18 UTC