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 14:05:15 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912011205p4a5cc5fcqa6a9c3752c898968@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Jeroen van der Gun
<noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl> wrote:
> The real question that needs to be asked is: are tables and images
> fundamentally different? The answer is no. They are both objects in a
> document.

We have complete disagreement right from the start: tables and images
are _not_ the same thing.


 They are both usually numbered. They are both referenced
> from within the document text. They can both be moved around if they
> are referenced properly. In other words, they are both suitable to be
> the content of a figure element. This also applies to other objects,
> such as large equations, blocks of computer code and the other objects
> mentioned earlier in this discussion. That they are usually styled the
> same, as indicated earlier, confirms this.
>
> I am not talking about inline images here (such as emoticons) and
> tables/equations/etc. that have one exact position in the document
> text. Because of this they are naturally described by the text and a
> caption should not be permitted. They simply cannot be seen as
> individual units.
>
> The aside element has also be mentioned. The aside element cannot
> fulfil the role of the figure element, since it is a too strong
> separation from the main content. Aside elements pretty much do not
> convey any information related to the document that is not mentioned
> elsewhere inside the document. Figure elements on the other hand have
> a strong connection to the document and convey additional information;
> that they are not tied to one specific point in the document, does not
> mean that they can be removed from the document without loss of
> information.
>
> Then there is only one issue left. Tables already have their own way
> of attaching a caption. I therefore suggest dropping the caption
> element in favour of the figure element. Tables that need a caption
> can be embedded in a figure element, just like images, large
> equations, blocks of computer code and the rest. This way there is one
> universal mechanism that works the same for all of these.
>

Folks are focusing on getting something to work -- caption with
something else. If you all want to create a new element that is
nothing more than a lump of HTML with a caption, what do we call a
section? Or an article?

Do we really need something else, too?

> Jeroen van der Gun
> http://www.jeroenvandergun.nl
>
>
>

Shelley
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 20:05:49 UTC

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