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

[whatwg] The IMG element, proposing a CAPTION attribute

From: Michel Fortin <michel.fortin@michelf.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:28:13 -0500
Message-ID: <7A159D0F-5DDC-4931-980C-4FF7B26E05BC@michelf.com>
Le 22 nov. 2006 ? 12:15, Alexey Feldgendler a ?crit :

> I'm not saying it's a caption either. A caption is just one of the  
> possible ways of rendering a title.

But is a caption limited to a title? Very often, captions contains  
some explanations too. I just opened a computer architecture book  
near me I knew was full of figures and the first figure I spotted had  
a eleven-line caption -- 5 complete sentences.

I know not everyone use captions like this. But calling captions  
"title" pose two problems: it clashes in name with the title  
attribute, making both of them a little more ambiguous, and it  
somewhat limit the correct usage, leaving a hole to be filled for any  
additional explanation that needs to be attached to the figure.


> It's not clear for Google Images which needs to extract (image,  
> title) pairs from documents.

But isn't this a weakness in the table markup? I mean, what if I was  
using this table layout for non-image data instead, should it be done  
any different? Maybe scope="" or some other attributes would be more  
appropriate to express the association.

And I'm not even sure a table is appropriate in this case. Isn't the  
table there for purely presentational reasons?


Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://www.michelf.com/
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:28:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:49 UTC