- From: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:41:19 +0200 (CEST)
- To: www-html@w3.org
On 31 Mar, Shane McCarron wrote: > I suspect I have exacerbated the problem here by using a poor example. It was, actually, an excellent example. > The intent of a universal @src is not really so you end up duplicating > fallback content for paragraphs. Obviously you *could* do this, but > just because you *can* do a thing does not mean you *should* do a > thing. Indeed. However, that doesn't change the fact that by running very much amok with the generalisation - and I /would/ argue it - the option is given, and will be misused. > nor sufficiently semantically rich. By exposing these attributes and > their behavior everywhere, the content author can have very fine > grained control over what gets delivered. It's a good, if misdirected, intent. The problem is the "everywhere" and the "fine grained" control. I predict the SRC option in XHTML 2 will be used for two things: templates - ie. <div src="footer.html"> where 'footer.html' contain a section of markup - and frame replacements. The intent to simply make it possible to replace, say, graphical elements with rich alternative content won't prevent this. > And, just to be clear, this is NOT frames. It is more like IMG with > fallback behavior. If you want to see the future of frames, check out Again, I must disagree. Regardless of the xframes spec, when an author can toss two DIVs with associated SRC and STYLE attributes, adding in fixed positioning and overflow, onto a page and get what looks like frames ... then authors WILL do it. I'll wager you a pint of ale. Already, today, we are being asked "how can I use CSS to create frames?" and the answer "you can mimic the layout, but not the functionality" is not appreciated. In the future you can do both - and I'll be positively shocked if that wasn't exactly what happens. Yes, my view /is/ that we shouldn't provide mechanisms that we can reasonably expect will be misused. SRC is such a mechanism. In all cases, except for actual object replacement, what SRC do can be better done server-side. It's a solution looking for a problem. Much kudos to the WG for listening to the i18n/accessiblity crowd, but this isn't going to improve anything. -- - Tina Holmboe Greytower Technologies tina@greytower.net http://www.greytower.net +46 708 557 905
Received on Saturday, 31 March 2007 16:41:28 UTC