[whatwg] several messages about XML syntax and HTML5
alexey at feldgendler.ru
Sun Dec 10 20:55:55 PST 2006
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 06:25:27 +0600, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>> 1.) Inserting Sam Ruby's SVG logo into HTML, for one example.
> The <img> element already supports images in HTML. You can even embed
> images directly in the page with data: URIs, regardless of the format (be
> it PNG, JPEG, or SVG, for example.)
You won't be able to manipulate the SVG DOM in this case. Also, data: URIs are inconvenient to write, and they are only usable for very short data strings.
>>> We already have such a mechanism, namely, plugins.
>> Two extension mechanisms are not possible?
> Redundancy is always possible. Whether it is desireable is the question.
These are actually two independent aspects:
1. Native support vs. plugins.
2. External resources vs. inline data.
Native support + external resources --> e.g. JPEG <img href="http://...">
Plugins + external resources --> e.g. Flash
Native support + inline data --> e.g. JPEG <img href="data:...">
Plugins + inline data --> no examples yet, but why not?
External resources vs. inline data are the ways that the spec defines things (e.g. data: URIs). Native support vs. plugins is what implementors decide, and it may vary from implementation to implementation (e.g. one browser displays PNG natively, another one does it through a plugin); this choice shouldn't affect how documents are written.
Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru>
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
More information about the whatwg