Re: Alternate proposals for ISSUE-83

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> In terms of formal process, here's what I expect is going to happen:
> 1) Most likely, no one will write a "zero edits" Counter-Proposal by the
> deadline.
> 2) At that point, we'll essentially be decided to get rid of <dt>/<dd> for
> <figure> and <details>, but with multiple options for what replaces them.
> 3) My hope is that in follow-up discussion we can pare down the options. My
> hope is that we'll find a single option which is most preferred by the Working
> Group, and agree that we can get behind it without having a formal bakeoff.
> 4) If we do get down to a single preferred option, I think there are
> reasonable odds that the editor will just adopt it, leading to an amicable
> resolution, and sparing us the work of a formal Working Group decision.

Indeed, I don't think there's particularly any need to go through the long 
drawn-out process in this instance, since this is primarily a judgement 
call and since what I consider to be the better call clearly doesn't have 
the support of the group. :-)

> A) Use <fltcap> as the caption for both <details> and <figure>. No special
> body elements. [Submitted by Shelley Powers]
> B) Use a caption="" attribute on any element as the caption for <figure>, with
> no special body element. No change for <details>. [Submitted by Tab Atkins]
> C) Use <fcaption> as the caption for <figure> and <dlabel> as the caption for
> <details>. No special body elements. [Submitted by Maciej Stachowiak]
> D) Use <fcaption> as the caption for <figure> and <dlabel> as the caption for
> <details>. Use optional <fbody> and <dbody> respectively for their bodies.
> [Submitted by Tab Atkins]

Personally I have a strong preference to option C of these, though no 
strong opinion on what the names should be. If I were forced to chose 
(e.g. if the chairs said the exact names were a matter of editorial 
discretion) then at the moment I would likely pick <figcaption> for 
<figure> (with deference to <optgroup>) and either <dsummary> or <summary> 
for <details>. However, I haven't studied the names carefully (since my 
editorial judgement was that we should use <legend> or <dt>/<dd>), and 
were I to chose I would have to do so carefully before picking one or the 
other, as with any change to the spec.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 23:00:39 UTC