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: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:58:14 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912020758n7aecb19bgc56d1359881ad17b@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Sorry, typo:

You all are taking _something_ from one medium and insisting it be treated
exactly the same in a completely different medium.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Jeroen van der Gun
> <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl> wrote:
>> Whether something is being labeled as a figure in literature, does not
>> matter. The figure element is for things that have the structure of a
>> figure. The element could also be named the figurestructure element,
>> but that would be long and annoying.
>
> A figure in literature is a flat thing, with no meaning other than
> what the context of the writing gives it.
>
> So an illustrative figure of a table can be included as a figure, and
> it doesn't matter. Well, other than you might be breaking style
> guidelines.
>
> But a web page is a different beastie. In a web page, a table is a
> data table. Browsers and other user agents don't know that the table
> is junk, or illustrative only. Browsers and web bots and other agents
> don't know that the data in the table is illustrative only, and not
> meaningful.
>
> Figures in a book are illustrative, regardless of what they contain.
> HTML tables are not illustrative, they are data tables.
>
> We're just now getting people to stop abusing HTML tables for layout,
> and now we want to encourage people to abuse HTML tables for
> illustration purposes?
>
> You all are taking someone from one medium and insisting it be treated
> exactly the same in a completely different medium.
>
>>
>> Making the caption required seems fair enough to me. Agreed.
>>
>> Linking to a figure is easy, just use the id attribute. You don't need
>> an a element to define an anchor. (If I remember correctly, the
>> specification explicitly uses the same mechanism for linking to dfn
>> elements.) Here's an example (I've also included a table (with a
>> footnote) used as a figure):
>>
>> <figure id="firstemo">
>> <dd><pre>:)</pre></dd>
>> <dt>Figure 3. The first emoticon.</dt>
>> </figure>
>>
>> <figure id="commonemos">
>> <dd>
>> <table>
>> <thead>
>> <tr><th>Emoticon</th><th>Frequency<a href="#personalusage">*</a></th></tr>
>> </thead>
>> <tbody>
>> <tr><td><pre>:)</pre></td><td>138</td></tr>
>> <tr><td><pre>:D</pre></td><td>112</td></tr>
>> <tr><td><pre>:P</pre></td><td>87</td></tr>
>> <tr><td><pre>:(</pre></td><td>29</td></tr>
>> </tbody>
>> </table>
>> <p id="personalusage">* The usage frequencies listed here are personal.</p>
>> </dd>
>> <dt>Table 2. Emoticons and their usage frequencies.</dt>
>> </figure>
>>
>> <p>A colon and a closing parenthesis formed the first smiley,
>> as shown in <a href="#firstemo">Figure 3</a>.</p>
>> <p>More emoticons were created later on.
>> See <a href="#commonemos">Table 2</a> for details.</p>
>>
>
> So now, contrary to most style guildelines and publications, you're
> putting tables into the figure element, and just pretending that
> figure is really anything.
>
> You're saying we should just ignore practice and good usage, because
> it works technically, and that's all that matters: it works
> technically.
>
>
>>
>> Jeroen van der Gun
>> http://www.jeroenvandergun.nl
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Shelley
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2009 15:58:50 UTC

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