- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 11:47:08 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Oct 7, 2010, at 11:12 AM, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Karl Dubost wrote: >> Le 5 oct. 2010 à 12:30, Ian Hickson a écrit : >>> What people do _not_ do with figures is put them in the middle of >>> sentences. >> >> What about Sparklines? >> http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0001OR&topic_id=1 > > All of the figures on those pages are either between paragraphs or floated > (in the latter case the exact position in the markup can't be guessed, but > there's no reason to put such figures in the middle of a sentence either; > doing so makes it harder to maintain). > > There are a number of inline images on those pages, but those would be > equivalent to just <img> with alternative text, IMHO, not <figure>. There are examples in that text that have sparklines in a paragraph, though coincidentally not ones that also have a caption. Let's imagine the glucose sparkline from the first page was included inline in a paragraph, including its caption of "glucose 128". <img> with alternative text does not capture the semantic association between the caption and the associated illustration. Why would <figure> be semantically wrong? Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 18:47:42 UTC