- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:34:46 -0600
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. The intention was that images and tables are the same *in that context*. It is of course obvious that they are not the same in general. The next paragraph in Jeroen's email makes it clear what context he is referring to. > 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? I don't understand what you mean. Do you think that <section> and <article> are some means of associating a caption with some content? Or do you mean something else? ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 20:35:22 UTC