W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > December 2009

[Bug 8555] Remove the Meter Element

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:10:35 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NP0Nn-0004Bz-5D@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8555





--- Comment #3 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>  2009-12-27 21:10:34 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> ...
> > Even the graphical example about half way through the section, showing Usenet
> > subscriptions, doesn't really add much information. One can see that 618
> > subscribers is significantly more than 22, just by reading the numbers--one
> > doesn't to see a picture to comprehend the difference. On the contrary, without
> > understanding why there seems to be an upper range, the gauge doesn't mean a
> > lot. Is the upper range a Usenet limit? The largest Usenet membership? Some
> > arbitrary number picked so one can have a cool picture? 
> ...
> 
> It might be that there could be reasons to question the "<meter>" element.
> However, with regard to the Usenet example,  then its code example looks like
> this:
> 
> <p><meter value="0.5">Moderate activity,</meter> Usenet, 618 subscribers</p>
> 
> I could be wrong, but based on the code, it seems to me that the "moderate
> activity" here is not related to the numbers of subscribers but to the amount
> of activity within the group. Clearly, the activity level, is nothing more than
> the amount of postings withing a certain time frame.  (Thus the activity could
> have been measured and presented in numbers.)  The activity level is related to
> the amount of subscribers, probably, but not necessarily one-to-one. There
> could be many members but little activity.
> 

Thanks for clarification. I assumed there was a correlation between the text
value next to the graphic and the graphic, but as you say, there may not be any
correlation at all. However, without any indicator of gauge values, the gauge
is inherently worthless. It would be clearer just to write out the text:
moderator activity, light, or heavy. 

> One could however, in my view, imagine that <meter> could be used to indicate
> if a group had few, on average or many members - if such a presentation would
> be useful for the readers.
> 
> I agree that the example however is a bit unclear: When I look at the activity
> meter then there is no way that I can know what it tries to tell me, as it
> lacks any  caption saying "Activity level last week" - or something like that.
> 

Frankly, I just can't see much value with the meter. In gauges, and in many
progress bars, end point values are printed as well as the graphic. And, as you
say, there's a caption for the graphic, indicating exactly what the gauge is
for. 

Regardless, there's nothing about meter that can't be as easily indicated using
existing technologies, such as ARIA, RDFa, PNGs, SVG, CSS, and/or existing HTML
elements.  And in fact, using existing technologies would most likely do a
superior job. 

The section reflects the author's interest in the element, which is not
particularly strong (as noted in his email I referenced.)


-- 
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 Sunday, 27 December 2009 21:10:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:30:43 UTC