On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Simon Pieters <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 06:34:05 +0100, Simon Fraser <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Dec 1, 2010, at 5:37 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Robert O'Callahan <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > In the absence of compelling use cases, I'd just leave it at <img>, >>> > <canvas> >>> > and <video> and whitelist in more elements later if necessary. >>> >>> <input type=image>? <object>/<embed> seem to have roughly equivalent >>> use-cases to <video> (though perhaps we just want to encourage >>> <video>). >>> >>> <object> can contain fallback content which might get tricky. >> >> So can <video>. > > <video> never renders the fallback content.
<img> does, though, if the resource for whatever reason hasn't been received and successfully decoded yet. (I'd be fine with this being defined in CSSOM Views instead of HTML5. I just can't define it in a normal CSS spec, since we're officially host-language neutral *and* have no concept of elements outside the document tree.) ~TJ
