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

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





--- Comment #48 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>  2009-12-01 12:44:21 ---
(In reply to comment #47)
> (In reply to comment #45)
> > (In reply to comment #44)
> > > (In reply to comment #43)
> > > > (In reply to comment #38)
> > > > > Here is another example of a table as a figure, this time with real data, not
> > > > > fake data meant for illustrative purposes:
> > > > > http://books.google.com/books?id=QbdMOM89qv0C&lpg=PA555&dq=%22table%20in%20figure%22&lr=&pg=PA556#v=onepage&q=%22table%20in%20figure%22&f=false
> > > > > 
> > > > > I can produce literally tens of examples of these without trying.  This is
> > > > > *precisely* the usage as currently defined in the spec.
> > > > 
> > > > And where do you place the footnotes of that table, so that it fits with what
> > > > is currently defined in the spec?
> > > 
> > > <figure>
> > >   <table>...</table>
> > >   <p caption>Figure 1: an illustrative table with content you can copy because
> > > the HTML5 spec [1] is so nice as to allow it inside &lt;figure></p>
> > >   <a class="reference" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/">[1]</a><br>
> > >   <small>&copy; Santa Clause. No rights reserved.</small>
> > > </figure>

     [ snipping my example etc ]    

> In your example the footnotes are contained within what I would call "the
> content", as opposed to "the caption". That example seems fine by me, no
> objections (except that <object> means nothing and has plenty of parsing
> quirks, just use <div> instead).

I don't understand what you mean by <object> "means nothing". It clearly does. 
HTML 5 fails to say that it is a sectioning root. But it clearly is. Or else
screen readers would generate an outline that differs from the usual browsers.

And to say out in the air that <object> has many parsing quirks is not helpful.
I am, in fact, not aware of any parsing bugs for <object> when it is used as a
wrapper. OK, of course, i IE6/IE7 there are bugs. But that's the same for
<figure><dt><dd></figure> - and the solution there was "use a div".  The
solution to IE6/IE7's problem with <object> is the same: Use a div - even a
span, depending on.

> If dd/dt sticks, there is no ambiguity. Otherwise, anything not marked up as
> the caption is the content. The issue with my example is that it also has some
> license information which is neither content or not caption. I don't know if
> it's a good idea and this is certainly not the place to discuss it.

Regarding the lisence info: this to mee seems like meta info, which should
normally go into the caption. E.g. in online newspapers, the name of the
photographer often goes into the image caption.

Bert Bos has written about captions:
http://www.w3.org/Style/Examples/007/figures 
Bert learns us that HTML3 proposed a <fig> element:
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/figures
And that XHTML2 (at one stage) had a caption element for <object>. 

All these examples talks about adding a caption to an image/graphic. I just
mention it "for the record".


-- 
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 12:44:24 UTC