- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:30:02 -0500
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, public-html@w3.org
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > 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. Maybe start thinking about a new generic term? <synopsis>, <abstract>, <precis> come to mind. Others? Best Regards, Laura -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 14:30:38 UTC