- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 13:11:19 +0200
- To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie
- CC: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Mike Smith <mike@w3.org>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "wai-liaison@w3.org" <wai-liaison@w3.org>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
Joshue O Connor wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Ian Hickson wrote: >>> Is the need not served by <caption>? > >> No. A caption is provided visually. [...] > > It is also worth noting that <caption> is a terse descriptor. @summary > is a long descriptor. Since this is clearly going to be a long discussion it might help (and would certainly help me) if we start from clear premises. So it would be great if statements like "<caption> is..." could be clear about whether they are referring to spec requirements, actual author practice, some sort of best practice (that may or may not match actual common practice), or something else, along with pointer to the relevant documentation/evidence. In this case I can't see anything in a HTML spec to back up your claim that <caption> must be terse whilst @summary must be long. In general it seems problematic to require that caption be terse because certain types of documents inherently have long table captions; scientific papers often put a paragraph or more of text in the table caption explaining how to read the table, for example.
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2009 11:12:41 UTC