- From: Benoit Piette <benoit.piette@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 17:22:26 -0400
- To: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <k2secc676291005021422w1428a2adtc9f67b1b0825ce90@mail.gmail.com>
Hi, I’ve read some of the discussions and the various change proposals on this. Here is my opinion on the issue. The Figure element seems at first look a way to encapsulate an image and its caption in a more structural way than a div with an image and a paragraph with the image having an aria-labeledby linking the paragraph for accessibility. The figure element can also include diagrams, codes, poems, or anything that can be grouped, annotated and maybe could be put outside the main flow of the document. As such, I find the name figure confusing because it can be used for something else than a figure / image. The semantic difference between figure, aside and details is minimal and I think it might become confusing for authors. All of them are grouping elements, figure and aside are related to a section / content /page, figure is referred in the document, but not aside. Both details and figure have captions / summary, but have different default behavior / presentation. What if aside had a caption element? I am not sure of the usability of those elements. Their use will probably depend on the usefulness of their default presentation / behavior and the impact they could have on SEO and such. They don’t bring much value to the table and there is a good chance they might be misused. I would like to know the impact on accessibility that a figure element is misused? If figure is used instead of aside, or even article… Is figure only useful to add presentation to a grouping element or does it have real semantic value? If the reason to have figure is to force a caption element to a group so that assistive technology can use it to give better accessibility, then maybe a similar element that can be used on any grouping element would be a better idea. As such, I am not sure if the figure element is really useful. I could definitely live without it. On blogs, long documents and articles it can have its place, elsewhere… meh. A small question: In a slideshow of product photos in an e-commerce web site, would figure be the correct element to use? Could a caption describe (or label) many images? With all of this, I mildly support the change proposal to remove the figure element. I don’t think it adds very much to HTML except maybe confusion. The figcaption name is definitely something that should be changed. I am sure this will be dealt with in time. So basically, yep, I said it, I don’t really care about this element. I may end up using it on my blog, but for professional stuff ? Time will tell. Regards, Benoit Piette http://benoitpiette.com http://w3qc.org
Received on Sunday, 2 May 2010 21:23:00 UTC