Re: aside and figure elements

Bruce Lawson, Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:23:32 +0100:
> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 10:29:07 +0100, Laura Carlson
> <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Another question, John, do you find the definitions of aside and
>> figure too close in meaning? Should the definitions be changed? If so
>> how? The definitions of the aside and figure sound almost identical,
>> except that figure has a caption. Do you consider the overlapping
>> definitions problematic? Developers will tend to confuse the two
>> elements and use them incorrectly.
> 
> They're especially similar where figure has no caption.
> 
> I wrote to the WG on this in July last year
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-July/020710.html
> 
> Main difference, in such a case, seems to me to be that aside affects 
> document outline, as it's sectioning content, while figure doesn't.

Not specifically related to that message, but don't you think that one 
advantage/difference is that it would be logical to say

<figure role="img" >

whereas it would typically not be logical to say

<aside role="img">

?
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Monday, 7 June 2010 15:25:03 UTC