[whatwg] Embedding Elements Should be Structured Inline-Level

[Colin Lieberman]

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 à 1:23, Lachlan Hunt a écrit :
>
>> 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/
>
>
>