- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 04:45:00 +0100
- To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Robert J Burns 2009-02-09 09.08: > ReportedBy: Henri Sivonen On Feb 9, 2009, at 1:17 AM: >> [..] If <legend> is used, this is a rather notable barrier >> for author adoption of <figure> even if the generation of >> implied fieldset were removed in a future release. >> >> Furthermore, the <legend> element comes with form-related DOM >> baggage: the HTMLLegendElement interface from DOM Level 2 >> HTML. Valid also for <details> which also uses <legend> for captions. <legend> appears difficult to style in WebKit as well - it seems to be impossible to select via CSS, just like <caption>. >> Since the English thesaurus has been exhausted, I suggest >> minting a new element name that has some qualifying prefix >> for the word "caption": e.g. <figcaption>. (I'm assuming here >> that <rubric> wouldn't be appropriate.) Unlike <rubric>, <figcaption> wouldn't work inside <details>. What about <subject>? (In line with <figure>'s semantics, which is to represent content that "can be moved away from the main flow of the document without affecting the document's meaning.) I would also like to suggest that <figure> and <details> should have a content elemen - e.g. <content>. Many would be adding e.g. <div> on their own, anyhow. Having a <content> element would make it easier to select the content via CSS. Or what are the advantages of not having a content element? > Since it seems "caption" is really the word we're looking for, > but legacy parsing wants caption to be properly placed in a > table, why not simply make a legacy synonym element [...] > <table f > <caption>some caption text</caption> <tr><td><img > src='uri' alt='alt text' > </table> If the Mozilla folks are satisified with new elements, then I would prefer such a solution. I'm also not sure that <caption> is the best element. I would prefer to avoid anything that could make us primarely consider <figure> an advanced image presentation element. After all, its semantics are content "which can be moved away from the main flow of the document without affecting the document's meaning". A caption element such as "thema" or "subject" could in my view be better than "caption". However, here is a backward compatible solution that you perhaps would not see the need for synonyms for: <figure> <dd>figure body</dd> <dt>caption</dt> </figure> EITHER: one <dt> could be placed freely before or after <dd>, Though for IE 6/7 compatibility, <dt> must be last child; OR: For maximum IE 6/7 compatibility - and ditto less CSS IE 6/7 gymnastics: two <dt> elements could be permitted. One as first child and one as last child. One of them must be empty. (This latter option - two <DT> elements - could, in your words, be considered a synonym.) - CSS gymnastics needed in IE 6/7 to display <dt> as top-caption; - display:table-caption for all other browsers. - <dd> to let Firefox 2 contain block elements without workarounds. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 03:45:47 UTC