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

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

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 19:11:30 +0200
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Message-ID: <20110826191130830424.924d671e@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Andrew Fedoniouk, Fri, 26 Aug 2011 08:18:57 -0700:
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 3:14 AM
>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 06:17:21 +0200, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:

>>> caption { display:block; }
>>> table > caption { display:table-caption; }
    ...
>>> My pardon if it was discussed already.
>> 
>> http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1122

> http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1123
  ...
> As you see <legend> is parsed in even it is used outside of
> <fieldset> but <caption> for some reason is simply ignored.
> Very strange logic to be honest.

Sometimes I regret that we problematisized the <legend/> element: [1]

]]
  * The figure element now uses a new element figcaption rather
    than legend because people want to use HTML5 long before it
    reaches W3C Recommendation.
  * The details element now uses a new element summary for exactly
    the same reason.
[[

But as your example code shows: Had we choosen <caption/> rather than 
<figcaption/> and <summary/>, the time before people could use 
<figure/> and <details/> would probably have been prolonged rather than 
diminished. 
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/#changes-2009-08-25
-- 
Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 17:12:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:27 UTC