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

Re: Bug 8404 -- taking it to the lists

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 13:08:31 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912011108q75942105pce4e83aedf2f9b7d@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steve Axthelm <steveax@pobox.com>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Steve Axthelm <steveax@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2009-12-01 Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The figure element either should be pulled completely, in favor of the
>> aside
>> element, or it needs to have a tighter focus in its definition. It should
>> consist of a graphic element, which could be an svg element, a mathml
>> element,
>> an img, an object, or, possibly, a video.
> I disagree and really don't understand why you wish to restrict authors. The
> members of this working group have an unusually broad experience base, and
> yet there is _no_ way we can cover all the ground that people using html5
> will be covering.
> Would this not be an appropriate figure?
> <http://pangram.org/w3/nose-topo.png>
> I would direct your attention to the "Rack" portion, which is essentially a
> data table.
> -Steve
> --
> Steve Axthelm
> steveax@pobox.com
You would use an img element to include your example. My proposal for
figure allows for the use of the img element.

As for restrictions, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting author
restrictions in HTML5. Don't use HTML tables for layout...don't use dl
for dialogs...(do/don't/do/don't) use the summary attribute with
tables, and so on.

True, people will want to use any element in any way, but that doesn't
mean we have to codify such usage.

Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 19:09:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:54 UTC