On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 00:46:27 +1000, Lachlan Hunt
<lachlan.hunt@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> [This should be in www-html, rather than www-html-editor since it's not
> really an issue.  It's more general discussion, so I've changed the
> recipient to be www-html@w3.org]

Thanks.  The news item just asks for feedback to be sent to the
-editor address, but I'm happy to be redirected as you suggest.
Apologies to Lachlan Hunt for pressing "Reply" rather than "Reply all"
first time around.

> <h src="/images/heading" type="image/png,image/gif">Heading</h>
>
> which is better than having to do
>
> <h><object data="/images/heading"
> type="image/png,image/gif">Heading</object></h>

Why is the first example better than the second?  It's slightly more
concise, but it's far from clear that it's worth the complexity and
confusion of having two different mechanisms to do the same job in
order to save 17 characters.  It just seems like a perfect example of
the sort of thing a well designed standard is not supposed to do -
don't resolve disputes on how to do something by putting both in the
standard.
-- 
  __
\/ o\ Paul Crowley
/\__/ www.ciphergoth.org