- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:05:15 -0600
- To: Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl> wrote: > The real question that needs to be asked is: are tables and images > fundamentally different? The answer is no. They are both objects in a > document. We have complete disagreement right from the start: tables and images are _not_ the same thing. They are both usually numbered. They are both referenced > from within the document text. They can both be moved around if they > are referenced properly. In other words, they are both suitable to be > the content of a figure element. This also applies to other objects, > such as large equations, blocks of computer code and the other objects > mentioned earlier in this discussion. That they are usually styled the > same, as indicated earlier, confirms this. > > I am not talking about inline images here (such as emoticons) and > tables/equations/etc. that have one exact position in the document > text. Because of this they are naturally described by the text and a > caption should not be permitted. They simply cannot be seen as > individual units. > > The aside element has also be mentioned. The aside element cannot > fulfil the role of the figure element, since it is a too strong > separation from the main content. Aside elements pretty much do not > convey any information related to the document that is not mentioned > elsewhere inside the document. Figure elements on the other hand have > a strong connection to the document and convey additional information; > that they are not tied to one specific point in the document, does not > mean that they can be removed from the document without loss of > information. > > Then there is only one issue left. Tables already have their own way > of attaching a caption. I therefore suggest dropping the caption > element in favour of the figure element. Tables that need a caption > can be embedded in a figure element, just like images, large > equations, blocks of computer code and the rest. This way there is one > universal mechanism that works the same for all of these. > Folks are focusing on getting something to work -- caption with something else. If you all want to create a new element that is nothing more than a lump of HTML with a caption, what do we call a section? Or an article? Do we really need something else, too? > Jeroen van der Gun > http://www.jeroenvandergun.nl > > > Shelley
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 20:05:49 UTC