Embed is not in the HTML spec 3.2 or 4.0

Discussion in 'HTML' started by kenneth02394832, Mar 22, 2008.

  1. maybe i haven't asked before...

    embed is not really an official HTML 3.2 or 4.0 element...

    and it doesn't have a close tag </embed> isn't that true?

    on the other hand, <iframe> always requires a matching closing tag </
    iframe> or else it will be taken as things to display when iframe is
    not supported.

    is there a spec for the embed tag?
     
    kenneth02394832, Mar 22, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. kenneth02394832

    Gus Richter Guest

    kenneth02394832 wrote:
    > maybe i haven't asked before...
    >
    > embed is not really an official HTML 3.2 or 4.0 element...


    That'a right, it was a Netscape proprietary tag and never adopted by
    W3C, although I believe that all browsers actually do support it.

    > and it doesn't have a close tag </embed> isn't that true?


    Although it does not require a closing tag, it's best to use it - I
    always used it and in an example on Mozilla site, they use an embedded
    "embed" with closing tags. In an example at MSDN, they use it without a
    closing tag.

    > on the other hand, <iframe> always requires a matching closing tag </
    > iframe> or else it will be taken as things to display when iframe is
    > not supported.


    Always requires a closing tag.
    When used, a "Transitional/loose" doctype must be used whereby the
    browsers are set in Quirky Mode (not really desirable).
    The object element replaced it.

    > is there a spec for the embed tag?


    Not that I'm aware of. How about searching, like:
    <http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Gecko_Plugin_API_Reference:plug-in_Basics#Using_the_embed_Element_for_Plug-in_Display>

    --
    Gus
     
    Gus Richter, Mar 22, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Scripsit Gus Richter:

    >> embed is not really an official HTML 3.2 or 4.0 element...

    >
    > That'a right, it was a Netscape proprietary tag and never adopted by
    > W3C, although I believe that all browsers actually do support it.


    For some values of "all", basically "all that I care of", for some
    values of "I".

    The way to offer alternate content for browsers that do not recognize
    <embed> or have been configured not to perform embedding is
    <noembed>...</noembed>
    Typically you could put a link to the embedded content there. Actually,
    such a link is what you should probably _start_ with, and only then ask
    yourself whether embedding makes sense, for the browsing situations
    where it might work.

    >> and it doesn't have a close tag </embed> isn't that true?

    >
    > Although it does not require a closing tag, it's best to use it


    It looks rather pointless, but I don't see what harm it could do.

    [About <iframe>]
    > When used, a "Transitional/loose" doctype must be used whereby the
    > browsers are set in Quirky Mode (not really desirable).


    Nonsense. You can use a Strict doctype declaration, or a custom doctype,
    or a Transitional doctype including a URL, if you want to stay out of
    the broken mode. And it's called "Quirks Mode". Google for it.

    If you use a Strict doctype on a page that isn't Strict, the only effect
    is that if someone validates the page, he gets some error message(s).
    Big deal. Should _you_ want to validate such a page, you can use the
    "Doctype Override" in the W3C Validator.

    >> is there a spec for the embed tag?

    >
    > Not that I'm aware of.


    There is no _specification_. Vendors' descriptions are not
    specifications.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Mar 22, 2008
    #3
  4. "Jukka K. Korpela" <> writes:

    > You can use […] a custom
    > doctype […] if you want to
    > stay out of the broken mode.


    For some values of “customâ€. ;-) Unfortunately

    <!doctype html system>

    triggers quirks mode in Firefox and Safari. Which is pretty dumb.


    --
    ||| hexadecimal EBB
    o-o decimal 3771
    --oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
    205 goodbye binary 111010111011
     
    Eric B. Bednarz, Mar 22, 2008
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Helixpoint

    embed an image in an HTML email.

    Helixpoint, Jul 14, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    551
    J. Ptak
    Jul 16, 2003
  2. Jerry III
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,854
    Jerry III
    Oct 15, 2003
  3. Failure
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,139
    Failure
    Sep 7, 2003
  4. Andrew Chen
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    226
    David Chelimsky
    Mar 25, 2008
  5. Howard Kaikow
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    95
    Stewart Gordon
    Oct 12, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page