[Bug 8404] Refocus the figure element back to being a figure

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8404





--- Comment #42 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>  2009-12-01 06:01:16 ---
(In reply to comment #40)
> (In reply to comment #39)
> > 
> > So how do we differentiate a table that's for illustrative purposes in a
> > figure, from one that isn't illustrative and the data should be parsed and
> > loaded into the DOM? Do we want every table in every figure element to be
> > loaded into the DOM? 
> 
> Yes! That's superior in nearly every way to using an image of a table. Even if
> the table is purely for illustration purposes, you still want to be able to do
> Find in Text on it, to index it in search engines (maybe I remember some
> memorable entry from one of those tables) to copy/paste bits of the text, and
> to navigate the table structure in a screen reader (which will likely be a
> better illustration to a blind person than just alt text).
> 
> It's hard for me to believe that making an image of a data table is being
> seriously considered as a good approach.
> 

ou want to do searches on junk table entries? 

You want to have search engines return queries based on the junk table entries?

And I'm not sure that folks are going to want a screenreader reading junk data
entries from a table created purely for illustration. Especially a table that
doesn't contain a summary attribute...

But, chances are the tables listed as figures that you'll find with most of
these Google book searches were inserted into the books as images. Screenshots,
or scans from applications, or other books.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 06:01:26 UTC