[uf-discuss] Need a figure markup
greg at fotonotes.net
Sun Oct 30 17:24:07 PST 2005
Thanks for the links, Mark. The last object links is very
interesting. I the <param> tags and the object within an object adds
lots of flexibility. I might argue for a bit more, or perhaps more
browser recognition. Or I might continue to be provocative and say
<object> is pretty geeky compared -- we don't have a <document> tag
with <params> for describing paragraphs.
But it is something...
...view the poem in KublaKhan.txt here...
<PARAM name="font" valuetype="object" value="#tribune">
<P>You're missing a really cool poem viewer ...
On Oct 30, 2005, at 5:37 PM, Mark Pilgrim wrote:
> On 10/30/05, Ryan King <ryan at technorati.com> wrote:
>> Actually, that's not true. You can use <object> for images [http://
>> www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#edef-OBJECT], and, in
>> fact, in XHTML 2, that's the only way to include images.
> <object> is broken in IE/Win, which always treats it as an ActiveX
> object and may present security warnings, show too much (including all
> nested fallback objects), or show nothing at all.
> Also, <img> was reintroduced to XHTML 2, no doubt after a vigorous and
> healthy debate in which all parties treated each other with mutual
> respect. But now it has a different content model than <img> in XHTML
> 1 and HTML 4, which just goes to show that mutual respect is for
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the microformats-discuss