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

Re: ISSUE-90 background documentation on allowing any flow content in figure

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 07:58:28 -0500
Message-ID: <643cc0271003220558q5895a432u2731183ffbbae804@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2010, at 3:07 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>> The rationale for the editor declining bug 8404 is[1]:
>> Rationale: I actually agree with Shelley on this, and that's what HTML5
>> used to
>> say. However, it is one of the very few topics which got a _huge_ outcry
>> from
>> Web authors around the Web, demanding that <figure> be allowed to contain
>> basically any flow content (including sections, headings, paragraphs,
>> lists,
>> etc). That's why the spec says what it does now.
>> I searched through WhatWG and HTML WG email lists, and I didn't see
>> any significant pushback on the original definition of figure. Most of
>> the objections seemed to be attached to the bug, not in any email
>> list.
> Here's the email where the change to the figure content model was first
> announced:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-February/014038.html
> It has replies to multiple messages, some of the ones I was able to identify
> include:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2006-November/008015.html
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-July/012194.html
> There is probably more discussion to be found in the WHATWG list archives
> and elsewhere on the Web.
> Hope this helps,
> Maciej

Thank you, yes, it does help. I hadn't found the message where Ian
announced the change.

I did find the two from Michael, who seems to be the only person who
cared much about this. Frankly, most people were more interested in
discussing what the figure caption element should be called.

I don't have time to look further. If the Editor wants to provide more
links to support his rationale, I'd welcome them.

Received on Monday, 22 March 2010 12:59:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:13 UTC