- From: Colin Lieberman <colin@fontshop.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:11:08 -0700
For the given use case: <header> <h1><img src="/images/logo" alt="Company Name"></h1> <object data="flash"></object> </header> I think <figure> is in appropriate. The spec says: 'The |figure <http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#figure0>| element represents a paragraph <http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#paragraph> consisting of embedded content and a caption.' and from a semantic point of view, figure seems to connote an illustration or explanatory image. In the use case - a company logo - h1 is IMO important markup: the company logo is the document heading. I have no problems with images remaining inline only. Colin Lieberman Michel Fortin wrote: > Le 2007-03-14 ? 1:23, Lachlan Hunt a ?crit : > >> Hi, >> The spec currently defines most embedding elements (img, iframe, >> embed, object, video and canvas) as strictly inline level and thus >> only allows them to be used in contexts where strictly inline level >> content may be used. >> >> I think these elements should be defined as structured inline-level >> elements. When used in block level contexts, they should represent >> paragraphs. > > You're right that it's often a little silly to have an image alone in > its own paragraph. But maybe we could use <figure> for these cases: > > <figure> > <img> > </figure> > > Ok, this is not conformant with the current spec since it's missing a > legend, but in my opinion it should be allowed. > > > Michel Fortin > michel.fortin at michelf.com > http://www.michelf.com/ > > >
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 09:11:08 UTC