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

Re: Bug 8404 -- taking it to the lists

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 22:38:35 +0100
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20091202223835001089.731d033f@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Tab Atkins Jr., Wed, 2 Dec 2009 14:13:24 -0600:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Leif Halvard Silli:
>> The problem is that <figure>, the way it is defined in the HTML 5
>> draft, is *more* than the structure: it must also be possible to refer
>> to it outside of the context.
> 
> Please refer to the spec again.

]]
The figure element represents some flow content, optionally with a 
caption, that is self-contained and is typically referenced as a single 
unit from the main flow of the document.

The element can thus be used to annotate illustrations, diagrams, 
photos, code listings, etc, that are referred to from the main content 
of the document, but that could, without affecting the flow of the 
document, be moved away from that primary content, e.g. to the side of 
the page, to dedicated pages, or to an appendix.
[[

>  It is not *necessary* for the figure
> to be movable.  It is, however, common for it to be so.

The spec clearly says that <figure> is not meant for *all* annotated 
"illustrations, diagrams, photos, code listings" either. But only for 
those that hypothetically could have been removed from the document 
without affecting "the flow of the document". If the text says "See 
this figure: [figure]", then that is not hypothetically possible, 
unless you also add a second hypothesis: "... if the text had 
hypothetically been rewritten" ...

Academic texts refer to "illustrations, diagrams, photos, code 
listings" by referring to an enumerated identification string in the 
caption. While <figure> currently do not need a caption to be valid - 
much less is it required to have any form of an identification string 
inside the <figure> caption.

> The definition of <figure> is:
> "The figure element represents some flow content, optionally with a
> caption, that is self-contained and is typically referenced as a
> single unit from the main flow of the document."
> 
> The bit about it being movable is in the next paragraph, discussing
> what it can possibly be used for.

The second paragraph is an interpretation/explanation of the first 
paragraph. 

Btw, not many e-mail message ago, you used "could be moved away" as 
proof that you had found examples that constituted a figure: [1]

]]
In all of these cases the figures match
exactly with what the spec says - they are part of the document, but
could be moved away, perhaps into an appendix, without affecting the
meaning or flow of the document.
[[

http://www.w3.org/mid/dd0fbad0912010619m2eb235cs2cac7ba3e8eb8bc3@mail.gmail.com
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:39:14 UTC

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