- From: Adrian Roselli <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 13:10:20 +0000
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
- CC: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
> From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 6:54 AM > > Hi all > Silvia has cherry picked the proposed text[1] from the whatwg spec on the figure element > please review and feedback on where/if it is unclear or could be improved. > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/grouping-content.html#the-figure-element Should there be some sort of guidance (prohibition, suggestion against) using block-level elements in the <figcaption>? All the <figcaption> elements have no <p> or <div> in them. If someone wants to include two paragraphs in a <figcaption>, is it ok to use <p>s? For example, the <li> element has the following [1] about headings but is otherwise silent on block level elements: "Note: While it is conforming to include heading elements (e.g. h1) inside li elements, it likely does not convey the semantics that the author intended. A heading starts a new section, so a heading in a list implicitly splits the list into spanning multiple sections." I see heading elements being a particular risk given the notion that the <figure> can be separated from the main content (regardless of its non-sectioning role). Also, for cases where an author includes an image, I think at least a reminder to good alt attribute practice via a hyperlink might be a good idea [2] and maybe some guidance on whether or not the alt should match or correspond to the <figcaption>. [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/grouping-content.html#the-li-element [2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/embedded-content-0.html#alt
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 13:10:50 UTC