W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2006

[whatwg] image captions

From: Alexey Feldgendler <alexey@feldgendler.ru>
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 22:09:33 +0700
Message-ID: <op.s7m8d7zv1h6og4@pancake.feldgendler.ru>
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:59:15 +0700, Michel Fortin  
<michel.fortin at michelf.com> wrote:

>> As a user, I wouldn't want Opera to include image captions when  
>> navigating headers. I don't feel that the caption is a header -- it's  
>> no more of a header than a table caption is.

> You have a point. Obviously in an outline a figure isn't the same as  
> aside content. So maybe we could add a <figure> element which would work  
> the same as <aside> but with a specific purpose of illustrating what is  
> said. That way outliners could make a separate list of figures using the  
> figure headers. And, as I suggested for <aside> previouly, you could  
> make each header which is not part of the main content a <h> element  
> which will be ignored by legacy user-agents.

Actually, I tend to treat images and tables the same. Tables have  
<caption>s, and a user agent can make a list of tables for navigation. Why  
can't an image have a caption? I think images and tables are quite similar.

And I don't think that "heading" is the appropriate semantic entity for  
marking up captions. Rather than making them headers and at the same time  
taking measures so that they don't interfere with UA's outlining  
facilities, I'd rather say that headings should be left entirely for  
document outline, and captions are marked up explicitly as captions.

I'm replying to the mailing list, assuming that you have replied off-list  
by accident. There was nothing really private in your message, and I think  
the discussion hasn't went off-topic.


-- 
Opera M2 8.5 on Debian Linux 2.6.12-1-k7
* Origin: X-Man's Station [ICQ: 115226275] <alexey at feldgendler.ru>
Received on Friday, 7 April 2006 08:09:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:46 UTC