- 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>
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? <http://pangram.org/w3/nose-topo.png> I would direct your attention to the "Rack" portion, which is essentially a data table. -Steve -- Steve Axthelm steveax@pobox.com
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 18:34:11 UTC