- From: dolphinling <lists@dolphinling.net>
- Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:21:08 -0500
- To: www-html@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > Quoting dolphinling <lists@dolphinling.net>: > >>> That was a mistake. We need "target" at least for <object>. >> >> >> Why? >> >> If it's for the same reason that target currently exists and you're >> planning on using <object> like an iframe, then no, that's wrong. > > > I don't see why that would be wrong. It's wrong because of what I said in the next paragraph. :) Links are for moving from one resource to another, not for modifying the resource you're currently in. >> Links are for moving from one resource to another. <object> is for >> external data that is part of the current resource. If you're changing >> the source of the <object> data, then you're changing the current >> resource, and it belongs in the realm of javascript. >> >> ("Resource" here meaning the same thing it does in URL/URI) > > That's a related problem, yes. I hope that can be solved one day. > Perhaps using the identifier approach from XFrames or something else. It already is solved: use javascript. As I said before, if you're changing the source of the <object> data, then you're changing the current resource. Anything that changes the current resource is application-level and can be done with javascript if it's client-side or a server language if it's server-side. -- dolphinling <http://dolphinling.net/>
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2006 20:21:13 UTC