This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-embed-element Comment: <embed> should fire 'load' event so that it's more useful for e.g. SVG Posted from: 85.227.159.51 by simonp@opera.com
Why not just use <object> or <iframe> or <img> for SVG? <embed> seems like about the worst choice of element to embed it with.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: Don't use <embed> with SVG. Use <img>.
(In reply to comment #1) > Why not just use <object> or <iframe> or <img> for SVG? <object> is more verbose (not a lot, but still), <iframe> has a default border and doesn't resize itself after the image, <img> doesn't support scripting. > <embed> seems like > about the worst choice of element to embed it with. Why? (In reply to comment #2) > Rationale: Don't use <embed> with SVG. Why not? > Use <img>. <img> doesn't support scripting.
I think having a load event would also be useful when embedding scripted plugin content.
(In reply to comment #4) > I think having a load event would also be useful when embedding scripted plugin > content. SVG aside, this use case seems reasonable to me.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: Yeah, I could see a use case for firing a load event with regular plugins. At this point though I'd rather not add more features; I think we should wait for what is specced already to be tested and implemented interoperably. This isn't a critical feature since you can already do it fine with <object>.
This bug was cloned to create HTML WG bug 19033.
Would fixing bug 16136 make this moot?
I'm just going to let this happen automatically as part of bug 16136. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 16136 ***