OBJECT and FIG, was Take note Dan

Warren Steel (mudws@mail.olemiss.edu)
Tue, 14 May 1996 09:05:12 -0500


Message-Id: <199605141358.IAA19363@sunset.backbone.olemiss.edu>
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 09:05:12 -0500
To: www-html@w3.org
From: Warren Steel <mudws@mail.olemiss.edu>
Subject: OBJECT and FIG, was Take note Dan
Cc: MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu

Foteos Macrides, in response to comments on the need for CAPTION
and CREDIT in connection with the Embedded Objects, said:

"The discussion in the IETF HTML-WG therefor, promply, led to apparent
consensus that the container for blocking, controlling flow, and
incorporating CAPTION and/or CREDIT, should *not* have name FIG, but
rather FIGURE (surprise! 8-), or a yet more generic BLOCK (though
BLOCK is too generic for my taste 8-)...."

    This is entirely convincing.  The <OBJECT> draft is excellent,
and answers most objections to its predecessors that were voiced
by Foteos and others.  The SHAPE image maps look better than ever,
and the handling of multi-level degrading of applets is rather
ingenious.  My comments were to remind readers of the continuing 
need for a block-like image container with captions and credits,
which would be useful to authors in almost every field.  If the
proposed <OBJECT> element may be itself embedded in a block element
called <FIGURE>, which allows captions and credits, then all is
well.  I certainly acknowledge the need for a name other than <FIG> 
for this new element.  My own ignorance of these developments is 
due to the apparent omission of any mention of this new element 
in the <OBJECT> draft or in the HTML 3.2 spec.


Warren Steel                        mudws@mail.olemiss.edu
Department of Music              University of Mississippi
          URL: http://www.mcsr.olemiss.edu/~mudws/