[Bug 13296] The use of the <label> element as a 'caption' not clearly defined.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13296

--- Comment #9 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-07-19 18:35:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > Once again, there is no content model implications.  There is no conformance
> > criteria.
> 
> I disagree, but we shall see.

I'm... not sure how you can disagree.  That sentence links the word
"represents"; if you follow the link, it's a statement that UAs are expected to
render the element so that it conveys the represented meaning.  That's not a
conformance criteria, because there's no conformance words: not a single MAY,
SHOULD, or MUST in there.

Nor does the statement say or imply anything about the allowed contents of
<label>.  That is specified in subsequent sentences, which use conformance
words and actually talk about the contents of <label>.

> > Look in your dictionary for the definition of the word.
> 
> ?? So how is an author to know the difference between the 'spec' use of a term,
> or the Websters/Concise Oxford use of the term? This seems ad hoc, and your
> persistence that I should just forget this issue and 'look in the dictionary'
> isn't helping.

If a term is linked, it's a spec term, and you should use the spec's definition
(found by following the link) rather than the English dictionary.  If not, it's
an english word (or a generically techy word that we can expect readers to
understand if they have the appropriate background to understand the spec at
all).

-- 
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 Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:35:36 UTC