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 23:11:53 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NFFPN-0002QB-EK@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8404





--- Comment #15 from Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  2009-11-30 23:11:52 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (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.
> > 
> 
> I looked at the examples again, Maciej, and I noticed that the author is
> referring to Table 2.1 and so on. If we expand the semantics of figure to
> include code blocks, tables, and so on, then it really isn't a figure. If it
> becomes too general, than I'm not sure it's even useful. 
> 

Yes, that page has example of both figures and tables. It seems to be the usual
practice to consider tables distinct from figures, and the examples there
follow that convention. But it seems reasonably normal to treat a source code
snippet as a figure.

I think examples from academic writing (where the distinction of what is and
isn't a figure is carefully considered and made very clear) are more relevant
than specific people's opinions of what should be allowed in a figure.


-- 
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 23:11:54 UTC

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