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

Re: @caption vs <caption type="figure">

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:15:20 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0911212115k761c5dadv2e6fc111a5a596d3@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, "Ennals, Robert" <robert.ennals@intel.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "Carr, Wayne" <wayne.carr@intel.com>, "Tran, Dzung D" <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Leif Halvard Silli
<xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:18:10 -0600, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Shelley Powers  wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Ennals, Robert wrote:
>> There's nothing stopping us from making attributes affect the
>> semantics of an element.  In fact, we do so right now, with <time
>> pubdate>.  That is also my preferred solution to the <figure> issue -
>> I'd like to see a @caption attribute that can be added to any child of
>> <figure>.
> If there is nothing stopping us, then why didn't you instead propose an
> attribute for the <caption> element that could permit it to be used
> also outside <table>?

Because that won't do anything to solve the problem.  We're not
prevented from reusing <caption> because of semantics, we're prevented
from reusing it because most/all current and past implementations
treat <caption> outside of <table> in such a way that it's completely
unusable for <figure>.  Putting an attribute on it won't change this.

Received on Sunday, 22 November 2009 05:16:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:03 UTC