This topic is worrying me slightly, as I can only see two possible
outcomes :-
using <object> for everything,
images <object type="image/jpeg" data="some.jpg">
video <object type="application/ogg" data="video.ogg">
or defining separate tags for all possible content :-
<image>
<video>
<sound>
<etc...>
As I can't see how it can be a mix and match of the two approaches.
Gareth
On 16 Mar 2007, at 19:40, James Justin Harrell wrote:
--- Matthew Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's all about ease of authoring. If you were new to HTML,
would you
want to do this...
| <object data="TheEarth.mpeg" type="video/ogg-theora"></object>
...Or this...
| <video src="TheEarth.mpeg"></video>
Do you know the MIME type for Ogg Theora? I don't. I made it
up. If
the MIME type on the object listed doesn't say "video" in it,
would you
even know if the <object> element was for a video???
The type attribute for object elements is optional if the data
attribute is present. That's not
new either - it was also specified that way in HTML 4.01.
Some browsers have not been compliant about it, but people will
probably be able to use an object
element without a type attribute without worry before they're able
to use a video element without
worry.
There's several good reasons for introducing a video element, but I
don't consider easier markup
to be one of them.
