Jason M. Kikta <kiktajm@muohio.edu>:
>
> I think you misunderstood what I was saying (or I didn't present it
> well, which is more likely).

No, but I think you misunderstood me!

> It is important to break backwards compatibility in this case, because
> of an existing bug.

In a browser that doesn't support XHTML2 nor ever will in its current
version.

> <object data="test.png">
> <object data="test.jpg">
> <img src="test.gif" alt="Test Picture" />
> </object>
> </object>

In XHTML2 that should IMO be something like

  <object data="test"
   type="image/png, image/jpg;q=0.9, image/gif;q=0.8">
   Test
  </object>

combined with server-side content negotiation.
A browser should use the 'type' attribute to build its Accept header for
this resource.

> The problem is idiot browsers like IE,
> that can't render it properly but think that they can.

Yes, that's true for 'object' in HTML4.

There's a quote from Goethe that applies, but I don't dare to translate it
to English:
»Toren und gescheite Leute sind gleich unschädlich.
 Nur die Halbnarren und die Halbweisen, das sind die Gefährlichen.«

> Switching to <obj> would solve this problem, since IE would go to the
> <img> tag, and you would still have valid XHTML 2.

The 'img' element will not be in XHTML2.