W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > November 2009

[Bug 8404] Refocus the figure element back to being a figure

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:09:17 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NFFMr-00027V-Eo@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8404





--- Comment #14 from Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  2009-11-30 23:09:16 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > This page includes a number of examples of figures, tables and equations:
> > http://www.uefap.com/writing/function/chart.htm
> > 
> > It includes an example where source code is presented as a figure (Example 12).
> > It also includes some examples where a figure has multiple images with
> > individual labels, such as Example 7.
> > 
> 
> 
> Yes, but Example 12 is using an image that is a code snapshot. 

It's an image of some code on the Web page. I doubt it was typeset as an image
in the textbook that example was taken from. In the computer science papers I
looked at, it was even more clear that the figures containing source code were
typeset as text. And in HTML, it would certainly be preferable to use formatted
text instead of an image of text for such a figure.

> The same with multiple figures -- is it multiple images, or one image file with multiple
> images?

I expect the way it was typeset was with multiple images and text. Some of the
examples I found in textbooks certainly looked that way. And in HTML, you would
want to actually mark it up that way, in preference to putting text inside an
image.

> Again, I have to refer back to the book publication industry: a figure contains
> one image, and one caption. If you need multiple images, you either have
> multiple figures, or one figure that has one image file that contains multiple
> images. 

As I mentioned before, I saw a number of examples in textbooks and scientific
papers which did not match that exact pattern.

> During the discussions on what to use for caption one thing came through as
> pretty universal: everyone seemed to assume figure would have an image. I think
> anything else is, as you've said, pretty unusual.

I think it would be highly surprising if it were incorrect to use <figure> to
mark up the figures that actually appear in academic papers. <figure> should at
the very least allow the kind of content that people use in figures in print. 
For better or for worse, that includes source code, lists, multiple images with
text, and sometimes even tables.

Even with unusual content, <figure> has a valuable semantic use, as often one
wishes to extract a list of tables and figures from an article or book.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 23:09:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:05 UTC