W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2010

RE: aside and figure elements

From: Dean Leigh <dean.leigh@deanleigh.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 14:25:48 +0100
To: "'Leif Halvard Silli'" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, "'Laura Carlson'" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Bruce Lawson'" <brucel@opera.com>, "'Shelley Powers'" <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'HTML Accessibility Task Force'" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003001cb070e$1c384f20$54a8ed60$@leigh@deanleigh.co.uk>
Hi Leif,
> > 	<aside> cannot be moved to another context without losing a lot of
> > its original meaning. If you lose the link to the context - in any
> > meaning of "link" - the <aside> stops functioning as an aside.

Again I would recommend using something like ID and for="" to link the
<aside> to its relevant content.

Imagine a page describing the 4 seasons:

<h1>The four seasons<h1>

<article id=season1>
<p>'s <img>'s etc...

<article id=season2>
<h2>'s <p>'s <img>'s etc...

<article id=season3>
<h2>'s <p>'s <img>'s etc...

<article id=season4>
<h2>'s <p>'s <img>'s etc...

<h1>Additional seasonal facts<h1> (possibly in the right column but could be
anywhere on the page)
<aside for=season1>Spring is usually accompanied by birdsong</ aside>
<aside for=season2>Summer can change the colour of human skin</ aside>
<aside for=season3>Autumn can cause leave to fall from trees</ aside>
<aside for=season4>Winter can freeze water, solid</ aside>

This keeps the relationship separate from presentation but accessible to
readers, UAs and easy to style with CSS.

Dean Leigh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Leif Halvard Silli
> Sent: 08 June 2010 13:58
> To: Laura Carlson
> Cc: Bruce Lawson; Shelley Powers; HTML WG; HTML Accessibility Task Force
> Subject: Re: aside and figure elements
> Leif Halvard Silli, Tue, 8 Jun 2010 14:45:47 +0200:
> > Laura Carlson, Tue, 8 Jun 2010 06:21:32 -0500:
> >> Hi Leif,
> >>
> >>> The
> >>> point that should be emphasized is that a <figure>, regardless of its
> >>> close or distant relationship to the rest of the page, is an entity of
> >>> its own.
> >>
> >> How is that different from aside?
>   [.]
> > Attempt on defining the difference:
> >
> > 	<aside> cannot be moved to another context without loosing a lot of
> > its original meaning. If you loose the link to the context - in any
> > meaning of "link" - the <aside> stops functioning as an aside. Being
> > "tangentially related" it *is* related and dependent on to the context.
> >
> > 	<figure>, while it can also "take up" meaning from the context in
> > which it is located, it may also be moved to another location and still
> > be meaningful in itself and on its own. Thus a <figure> can be dropped
> > into many different contexts and still be meaningful.
> >
> > To better discern <figure> from <aside>,  how about *requiring*
> > <figure> to have a summary/caption? Because, the way I see it, unless a
> > <figure> has a caption, it is difficult to perceive it as an
> > independent entity suitable for more than one context.
> Next question: is it any *useful* to discern between <figure> and
> <aside>?
> I think, yes. I think an AT user e.g. might want to ask the user agent
> to provide an overview over all the figures a page/article has. This
> might be useful and interesting on its own.  Whereas to ask for a list
> of all the <aside>s of the page/article, while it could be interesting
> to read all the asides, one by one, the reader needs to have a lot more
> context for such a rehearsal to meaningful.
> I mean ... an 140 character message depends a lot on the reader knowing
> context.
> (I hope I am not putting too much of my private interpretation of the
> word "aside" into this.)
> --
> leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 13:27:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:20 UTC