- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:13:28 +0200
- To: "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Lars Gunther" <gunther@keryx.se>, "Leif Halvard Silli" <lhs@malform.no>, public-html@w3.org
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:26:47 +0200, Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> wrote: > Laura Carlson wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> What about using a <summary> as a generalized element with <details> >> etc. Leif mentioned this previously. >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jun/0045.html > This strikes me as an interesting proposal, and when it comes to Figure, > has been proposed by others[1]. The rejection of the idea, because of > how browsers currently implement the DOM for HTML4 puzzles me, since > we're changing the DOM for HTML5, anyway. <summary> would be no problem in <figure> and <details> as far as parsing goes. In <table>, however, it would be a problem because in legacy browsers the element would be moved outside the <table> in the DOM. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 14:14:25 UTC