voxpelliit may be a lack of microformats thinking on my behalf, but the HTML spec seems to make it clear that "alt" in its essence is "fallback content"
tanteklike I said for object, its contents are HTML, not text, so it's wrong to use the same approach (will cause you problems with what's escaped and what's not etc.)
tantekI understand. I'm trying to get at whether there is an actual real problem we are solving, or if we're being more theoretical with object. there have been other proposals for element specific special parsing rules, and we have rejected them due to lack of real world examples.
voxpelliAs I said: I would do with a "it would be simpler to" rather than saying that the difference I inferred is actually wrong and also to try and provide spec pointers to where my interpretation is wrong
tanteksame place in the HTML spec, <object> takes markup inside, the entirety of which is "fallback" for when the browser is unable to render the object itself for any reason
Loqi Almond-Anise Biscotti https://s3.amazonaws.com/perfectcontent/images/ef158110-1954-11e6-bced-45404e44cb61.jpg
@BloggersBooks Author hReview Plugin Review and Usage https://www.bloggersbooks.com/author-hreview-plugin-review-and-usage/ #Blogging, #Bloggers (twitter.com/_/status/839174937008955392)
tantek greetings microformats folks: looking for volunteers to help with minimal spec edit suggestions for this issue: https://github.com/microformats/microformats2-parsing/issues/2
Zegnat tantek, would the spec also need to incorporate fallback values for other embedded content (as per voxpelli’s comment https://github.com/microformats/microformats2-parsing/issues/2#issuecomment-232129210) or only for IMG elements?