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

[whatwg] image captions

From: Michel Fortin <michel.fortin@michelf.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 13:17:51 -0400
Message-ID: <0C4F74F0-D4D1-42F2-A1F7-4313264714C0@michelf.com>
Le 7 avr. 2006 ? 11:09, Alexey Feldgendler a ?crit :

> 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.

Well, I'm all for using <caption> -- it obviously is the most logical  
choice -- but, as stated in my first reply, the caption element is  
completely ignored by today's HTML parsers when outside the context  
of a table. This makes captions impossible to style or use within the  
DOM. That's why I'm suggesting an alternative that doesn't involve  
the caption element.

Personally, I can leave with a caption element that doesn't show up  
in the DOM of legacy user-agents. But given all the attention given  
to backward compatibility, it just seem a little out of place to  
ignore such an issue.


> 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.

Yes, that was an accident, and not the first. I'm used to some other  
lists where I can just hit reply.


Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://www.michelf.com/
Received on Friday, 7 April 2006 10:17:51 UTC

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