Re: HTML3 and FIG

Dave Raggett (dsr@hplb.hpl.hp.com)
Wed, 26 Apr 95 16:07:02 GMT


Message-Id: <199504261607.AA049492422@dragget.hpl.hp.com>
To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <kjetilho@ifi.uio.no>
Cc: www-html@www10.w3.org
Subject: Re: HTML3 and FIG 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 95 17:10:31 O."
             <199504261510.23750.surt.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> 
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 95 16:07:02 GMT
From: "Dave Raggett" <dsr@hplb.hpl.hp.com>


> [Dave Raggett]

> But <IMG> can't have captions. Shouldn't <IMG> be phased out in favour
> of the more general <FIG>? I think letting <IMG> have functionality
> <FIG> lacks is a "design bug".

IMG occurs within paragraphs, while FIG is a peer of paragraphs.
This choice should be a matter for debate though. Regardless of the
outcome, I believe that IMG still has a useful role for small graphics
that blend into the enclosing textline.

> Note: the browser should feel free to relocate the <FIG> to the end or
> beginning of the (enclosing) paragraph if flowing the text around it
> is not feasible/appropriate, much the same way figures in books float
> around. For <FIG>'s less than half the screen width, _I_ would prefer
> it if the browser put it in the middle of the stream of text.

Paragraphs can't currently enclose a FIG element, but even if they could
I still feel that breaking text lines across an image is bad practice.

The current specification seems a reasonable compromise between flexibility
for authors and the degree of complexity for browser developers.

-- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> url = http://www.hpl.hp.co.uk/people/dsr
   Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Filton Road, | tel: +44 117 922 8046
   Bristol BS12 6QZ, United Kingdom           | fax: +44 117 922 8924