W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Request for group input on ISSUE-83 (figure and details captions)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:07:54 -0800
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <58604F61-16E3-47D1-98DA-BCBDE3A0EB5E@apple.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>

So it sounds like no one else has strong feelings. I therefore suggest that Ian should implement the fcaption/dlabel Change Proposal:
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ChangeProposals/DdDtFcaptionDlabel

I think it would be fine to pick either of <fcaption> or <figcaption>, and either of <dlabel> or <dsummary>. Once that change is made, the Chairs will post a Call for Consensus to close this issue by amicable resolution.

Regards,
Maciej

On Jan 16, 2010, at 8:28 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> 
> On Jan 14, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Incidentally, now is a fine time to start discussing the possible
>> replacements for dt/dd. Right now on the table we have:
>> 
>> A) Use <fltcap> as the caption for both <details> and <figure>. No special
>> body elements. [Submitted by Shelley Powers]
>> B) Use a caption="" attribute on any element as the caption for <figure>,
>> with no special body element. No change for <details>. [Submitted by Tab
>> Atkins]
>> C) Use <fcaption> as the caption for <figure> and <dlabel> as the caption
>> for <details>. No special body elements. [Submitted by Maciej Stachowiak]
>> D) Use <fcaption> as the caption for <figure> and <dlabel> as the caption
>> for <details>. Use optional <fbody> and <dbody> respectively for their
>> bodies. [Submitted by Tab Atkins]
>> 
>> We may get more proposals by the deadline, but it would be totally fine to
>> start discussing the submitted ones now. If anyone (including and perhaps
>> especially the various Change Proposal authors) has an opinion on which of
>> these replacement solutions they like best, and which they strongly dislike,
>> that would be valuable input.
> 
> The deadline has essentially passed, and it looks like we are not going to get more proposals. Since I'd like to see this issue resolved relatively informally, I'd like to ask the Working Group for some input. Since I posted the original message, the following has occured:
> 
> - Shelley has decided to withdraw her original <fltcap> proposal, option (A)
> - It seems to me that not many Working Group members like option (B). Tab, do you feel strongly about this one, or are you willing to set it aside?
> - It seems that few people like having the <fbody> and <dbody> elements, and a number of participants are against. Tab, do you want to make the case for these more strongly, or let it go?
> - I'm willing to tweak the names I recommend as part of proposal (C) based on WG input. Does ayone have strong preferences here?
> 
> If I don't get any further input, I'm going to recommend to Ian to pick any of <fcaption>/<figcaption> and <dlabel>/<dsummary> at his discretion, and once that change is made, propose a CfC to close ISSUE-83 by amicable resolution.
> 
> Regards,
> Maciej
> 
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2010 04:08:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:12 UTC