Re: Re:

Mike Meyer (mwm@contessa.phone.net)
Wed, 12 Jul 95 14:06:04 PST


Subject:  Re: Re:
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.87.9507121444.A26501-0100000@novice.uwaterloo.ca>
From: mwm@contessa.phone.net (Mike Meyer)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 95 14:06:04 PST
Message-Id: <19950712.75748A0.C7EE@contessa.phone.net>
To: www-html@www10.w3.org

> > According to the HTML 3 DTD a FIG element is not allowed inside a P
> > element and terminates the P when it occurs. Here's your example in
> > a normalize form (and please note that your notation of the FIG
> > element itself was not right:
> It doesn't make sense to me that figures should break paragraphs.  This
> behaviour is disagreeable to me, and also makes <FIG> operate distinctly
> differently from <IMG> which it was supposed to replace.

FIG may have at one time been meant to repleace IMG (I certainly liked
the idea), but that's not currently the case.

> But i might just be missing the obvious. Is there a solid rationale for this?

IMG is meant for "inline" graphics, in the sense that they go in the
line of text. For this case, the limitations of ALT for non-GUI
browsers is bearable, though you wouldn't do it that way if you
weren't shackled by bad prior design.

FIG is meant for graphics that are not part of a text block (which is
why they aren't allowed in a <P>), but stand alone. Since there are no
documents to break by doing it right, it can be done right. This means
you get captions, client-side image maps, and such goodies as well.

For those who haven't noticed, the latest version of Lynx implements
FIG. You get the alternate text (complete with anchors), the caption,
and a link to the image the figure references. Works quite nicely.
Now, if only popular GUI browsers would implement it, so we could take
really advantage of it.

	<mike