- From: Steve Runyon <s.runyon@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:52:41 -0500
That's an interesting point James - I missed that the first time by. One minor point I would clarify: Alexey, you stated that <label for="XX" type="title"> would replace the "title" attribute. I assume you meant that it should *supplement* it, since you wouldn't want to preclude its use or mess with backward compatibility. It sounds like <label for="XX" type="title"> would be a *terrific* addition to HTML5, along with a new value for the "display" property, "tooltip". (I'm thinking of all the JS that I wouldn't have to write anymore! :-) On 11/22/06, Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru> wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:32:35 +0600, James Graham <jg307 at cam.ac.uk> wrote: > > > In general I think that having <img> and <imgcaption> (or whatever they > > are called) enclosed by a single element is a better idea since the > > increased simplicity makes rendering easier. For example, how would you > > expect a browser to render this?: > > > > <p>Foo > > <img id="bar"> > > <p>Foobar > > <p>Baz > > <imgcaption for="bar">Pictures are nice!</imgcaption> > > > > In all current UAs I guess it would render something like: > > > > Foo > > <img> > > Foobar > > Baz > > Pictures are nice > > This is exactly how I expect the above markup to be rendered. Unless the > <imgcaption> is taken out of the flow by specifying display:tooltip, it > should show where it's written. In fact, the difference between > <imgcaption> and <div> is no more than between <address> and <div>: > <imgcaption> is technically the same as <div> but conveys semantical > meaning that its content is a title for image #bar. > > > But I can't think of many situations where a figure's caption should be > > separate from the figure itself and, from the discussion above, it seems > > that some people would expect: > > > > Foo > > <img> > > Pictures are nice > > Foobar > > Baz > > No, I don't expect this. If the author wanted this, he would have written > <imgcaption> right after <img>. > > > Another issue to consider is the possibility of multiple images with a > > single caption (this is very common in scientific papers, print > > magazines, etc.). A construct like > > <figure> > > <img> > > <img> > > <img> > > <imgcaption> > > </figure> > > might be enough to support this (the details are, I think, non-trivial); > > something that requires the caption to point to exactly one image > cannot. > > I'm thinking of <label type="title"> as of just a fancy replacement for > the "title" attribute. In your example, I would write: > > <div id="fig1"> > <img> > <img> > <img> > </div> > <label for="fig1" type="title">...</label> > > ...probably using something more specific than <div> to group the <img> > elements. > > > -- > Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru> > [ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20061122/0060571b/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:52:41 UTC