Re: Bug 8404 -- taking it to the lists

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want to debate Tab, I find that telling a person to stop using
> an argument as justification isn't effective. I can use an argument,
> and you can provide a counter, and leave it to the reader to form
> their own conclusion as to which is the superior argument.

I am not attempting to debate.  This is not an opinion, or something
where reasonable people can differ.  It is a plain fact that figures,
in common usage, often contain code and tables (I'm certain I could
find a decent number of examples of figures containing prose as well,
perhaps of poetry being commented on).

I am simply correcting a mistaken assertion that you have made at
least twice, and am requesting that you stop making the assertion now
that it has been proven to be false.  It is a requirement of rational
debate that the debaters not purposely rely on false arguments.

> We can put illustrative tables in figure, but there is no way to mark
> the table as illustrative, and to suggest that the table not be parsed
> into the DOM, or parsed by search engines. We don't have this ability
> now, when we use tables for illustration contained within a div
> element, true, but the purpose behind figure is, I believe, because
> we're trying to improve the semantics of the markup. If this is true,
> then the semantics must be extended across all levels of the web page,
> and this includes the DOM.

This talk of "not [parsing a table] into the DOM" is a red herring.
There is no reason to not parse it in, even if it *is* purely
illustrative and does not contain any vital data in and of itself.
Maciej, in the bug, gave several reasons why one would want the
content of even illustrative tables to show up properly in the page
(searching, accessibility, etc.).

~TJ

Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 14:51:36 UTC