- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 11:12:10 -0600
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Jeroen van der Gun <noreplytopreventspam@blijbol.nl>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: >> We're just now getting people to stop abusing HTML tables for layout, >> and now we want to encourage people to abuse HTML tables for >> illustration purposes? > > Yes, because it's not abuse. It's still tabular data. Nothing about > <table> says that you should only use if it's *real* data. Data is > data is data, whether for illustrative purposes or what-have-you. > > Are you still suggesting that a better alternative is to screenshot > the table and insert the image into your page as a <figure> instead? > That is, in my opinion, ludicrous. What would you put as the > alt-text? What could possibly be a more appropriate description of > the table *than the table itself*? > > ~TJ > Most of the examples of tables I've seen used in figures that people have shown have, most likely, been screenshots anyway. That's why many so-called tables in figures have been in figures: because they're screen shots from other tools and other sources. The style guides that Laura produced even specifically say do NOT use a table in a figure, and there's reasons for this. Figures are illustrative -- the data is typically meaningless. If you want a table with meaningful data, you reference as a table, as in Table 1.1 and Table 1.2 and so on. There are even style elements in book publication templates that differ between a figure and a table, and a figure cannot contain anything that isn't an image file (typically a TIF or a PNG). I don't understand why people would disregard standards and styleguides and what not, from organizations and companies far more experienced at the publication business than most folks in this group, and look for a few examples (your 'tens' compared to tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of what we would expect for a figure), just because we seemingly can do all of this technically. And I don't understand why people would put illustrative tables as real HTML tables in a document, when the tables contain crap, and search engines will get the crap, and return people to the page who are expecting that the crap, is actually real. Figures are illustrative. This is the norm. Shelley
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2009 17:12:50 UTC