W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2011

<caption>, <figcaption>, <seccaption>, <divcaption>, etc.

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <andrew.fedoniouk@live.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 21:17:21 -0700
Message-ID: <BLU165-ds102F4D1643A3042E5B56A1F8130@phx.gbl>
To: <public-html@w3.org>
Each time when I see <figcaption> I want to ask:

What is conceptually wrong with using <caption> as it is in <figure>'s? 
Why do we need element with such ugly name as <figure>?
Why other grouping elements have no such caption counterparts?

It is enough to define something like this:

caption { display:block; }
table > caption { display:table-caption; }

in UA's default style sheet and we can use this element with its perfect 
semantic meaning.

My pardon if it was discussed already.

-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk.

http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 04:18:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:37 GMT