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

Re: Bug 8404 -- taking it to the lists

From: Steve Axthelm <steveax@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:33:36 -0800
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <r310ps-1058i-3D1F92892405495E999D0F8030854A3A@MBP.local>
On 2009-12-01 Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:

>The figure element either should be pulled completely, in favor of the aside
>element, or it needs to have a tighter focus in its definition. It should
>consist of a graphic element, which could be an svg element, a mathml element,
>an img, an object, or, possibly, a video.

I disagree and really don't understand why you wish to restrict 
authors. The members of this working group have an unusually 
broad experience base, and yet there is _no_ way we can cover 
all the ground that people using html5 will be covering.

Would this not be an appropriate figure?


I would direct your attention to the "Rack" portion, which is 
essentially a data table.


Steve Axthelm
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 18:34:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:04 UTC