W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2007

[whatwg] <figure> semantics when there's no fallback content (was: A revamp of the alt="" attribute on <img> elements)

From: Simon Pieters <zcorpan@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 22:04:38 +0200
Message-ID: <op.tw9t10hn7a8kvn@hp-a0a83fcd39d2>
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:55:50 +0200, Simon Pieters <zcorpan at gmail.com>  

> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:00:51 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>> The spec as it stands now makes a distinction between alt="" and no alt.
> How does no alt integrate with the semantics of <figure> in the fallback  
> case?

Thinking about it, <embed>, <video> and <audio> also don't have fallback  
content, but still the <figure> section assumes that there will be  
fallback content.

I would suggest that when the embedded content can't be used, and when  
there's no fallback content, the figure element still represents embedded  
content with a caption, so that e.g. users of HTML5-aware text-only  
browsers can read the caption and then download the embedded content to  
view in an external app.

Simon Pieters
Received on Saturday, 18 August 2007 13:04:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:36 UTC