This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 11598 - Figure element should not be restricted to flow agnostic images/videos/etc. "The element can thus be used to annotate illustrations, diagrams, photos, code listings, etc, that are referred to from the main content of the document, but that could, without
Summary: Figure element should not be restricted to flow agnostic images/videos/etc. "...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: LC1 HTML5 spec (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-12-23 13:13 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2011-08-04 05:35 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2010-12-23 13:13:30 UTC 
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/grouping-content.html
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-figure-element

Comment:
Figure element should not be restricted to flow agnostic images/videos/etc.
"The element can thus be used to annotate illustrations, diagrams, photos,
code listings, etc, that are referred to from the main content of the
document, but that could, without affecting the flow of the document, be moved
away from that primary content, e.g. to the side of the page, to dedicated
pages, or to an appendix." That sentence reduces the usefulness of the element
when people want to title an image/video/etc by 50%. For example: <p>But just
see how he was dressed:</p><figure><video
src=UTDGX2010></video><figcaption>UTDGX conference 2010</figcaption></figure>
<p>How stupid was that?</p> This is currently invalid use of the figure
element since it could not be moved away from its position in the flow. Why
should non flow agnostic images/videos/etc not be able to get a programatic
associated textcontent title? We all know the shortcomings of titles in
attributes. Therefore the invention of the figure element.

Posted from: 92.225.43.161
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-01-11 20:09:56 UTC 
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: It's not invalid. The spec doesn't say that <figure> must not be used for inline figure, it just says that <figure> can be used for things that could be taken out of flow. The only normative text is "The figure element represents some flow content, optionally with a caption, that is self-contained and is typically referenced as a single unit from the main flow of the document." (it's normative due to the definition of the word "represents"), and that sentence is consistent with the usage above.
Comment 2 Michael[tm] Smith 2011-08-04 05:35:32 UTC 
mass-move component to LC1