- 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