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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:32:35 +0600, James Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
