Re: <FIG> implies <P>?

Andrew McRae (mcrae@elmer.harvard.edu)
Thu, 13 Jul 1995 11:16:10 -0400 (EDT)


Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 11:16:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andrew McRae <mcrae@elmer.harvard.edu>
To: "Wilfredo Sanchez Jr." <tritan@calloway.mit.edu>
Cc: www-html@www10.w3.org
Subject: Re: <FIG> implies <P>?
In-Reply-To: <199507131349.JAA14062@calloway.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950713104135.24469A-100000@elmer.harvard.edu>

Hi, all.
On Thu, 13 Jul 1995, Wilfredo Sanchez Jr. wrote:
> I find this somewhat unneccessary. By implicitly breaking a paragraph
> with <fig>, one has made some useful features impossible, such as
> Mike's example:
  [ ASCII art representing figure in centre of paragraph deleted ]

No, no, no! 

Let's try to get this straight. A FIG cannot appear inside a P. One
consequence of this is that if you're parsing an HTML document, and you're
inside a P element, and you encounter "<FIG>", you should assume the P to
be closed at that point. That is, you should act as if there was a "</P>" 
just before the <FIG>. 

(So the title of this thread should really be "<FIG> implies </P>".)

That DOES NOT mean that there can't be some other way of indicating to an
HTML renderer that the FIG should be displayed "inside" the P. 

And relying on the FIG being contained within the P to indicate this gets 
you very little added functionality at the cost of a major increase in 
complexity -- FIGs can be very large, complex objects, and allowing them 
to be included in paragraphs as if they were characters just seems bizarre.

Cheers,
Andrew.
--
Andrew McRae  <andrew_mcrae@harvard.edu>