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

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





--- Comment #49 from Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>  2009-12-01 13:02:23 ---
(In reply to comment #48)
> (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.

"The object element can represent an external resource, which, depending on the
type of the resource, will either be treated as an image, as a nested browsing
context, or as an external resource to be processed by a plugin." Pretty close
to "nothing" in terms of semantics.

But stating "it has no semantics" when your suggestion is "give in semantics X"
is of course nonsense, I admit that. I don't think marking up the content
rather than the caption makes much of a difference though.

> 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 you think <object> is a good idea, take it to the list where more people can
see it. I'll try to refrain from any discussing anything but the actual
suggestion in this bug.


-- 
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 13:02:26 UTC