Flash alternatives

[Luke -Jr]

On Tuesday 09 September 2008 16:31:30 you wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 09 September 2008 14:53:10 you wrote:
> > > I think you need to define what you mean by HTML.
> > > http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/tagpages/b/blink.htm
> >
> > It doesn't work that way. HTML is well-defined: http://www.w3.org/html/
>
> Ah, so you DID mean the HTML standard and not HTML in general.  

The only "HTML" is "the HTML standard". There is no other "HTML".

>  If your site doesn't work in a user's browser, they're not going to say
> "Hey Safari, fix your browser" they're going to say "Hey web designer, fix
> your site." 

Funny, most of the time it's the opposite.

> Also, I repeat that in the current HTML standard (4.1), there is no such
> thing as a video tag.  You are referring to a tag that's defined in the
> HTML5.0 draft. 

No, I'm referring to the <object> tag.

> So yes, Konquerer may play it how you want it to (using a proprietary
> pluging),

MPlayer Plugin is not proprietary.

> Under the HTML 4.1 standard the only way to embed video is by using the
> object tag.  Part of the object tag is the type attribute.  This type
> determines what plugin is used to play the media.

The type is used to determine IF a plugin is needed by SOME browsers, perhaps, 
yes, but the type itself does NOT designate a plugin. The MIME type describes 
the content. Handling that content is the browser's job.