Seems like they could be essential to the content, but position is unrelated. . Personally, this is what I would use: It was a genuine attempt by bruce to provide what he thought would be a good alt text, so he should be commended not pilloried for his effort.
Using role=”img” on figure conveys to accessibility APIs there is an image and associating the figcaption content using aria-labelledby conveys the accessible name value for the img to accessibility APIs. And yes it’s a little bit extra work but it’s very minimal.
just hoping every browser starts supporting html5 and people move into them.
So this is nothing to be confused with in HTML. If we were to adopt all of ARIA natively into html5 then ARIA would not have anything that HTML5 does not. In this example, we said it’s “a story simply about a dignitary opening a new branch of Lidl” , so I think that in this example there is too much description here. Show your working out. I am getting a headache. have a look at Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5 for further info about this. Currently with XHTML 4.x and CSS 2.x In order to have a caption be right justified with an image (like the way your ‘Submit Comment’ button lines up with the right side of the ‘Enter Comment’ box) , the following conditions need to be met: 1. Is he hiding in the leaves ? Before I resorted to using a div->image with a div->caption nested inside to express these kind of structures.
Just remember to make sure it’s the most appropriate element for the job. Why? You can also use , and remember to use < and > for brackets. Too much information, but would be a good runner up. To me, a new element like figcontrols would make sense, but I don’t think that will happen. I don’t know if the p is unnecessary or not, but that’s not my main issue with this option anyway. In the end I’d like to vote for combining C and D. I don’t think that should include a
since this is such a short caption. He would be much portlier if you corrected the aspect ratio. @Steve Faulkner – Is it really true that img with no alt attribute is not presented to AT? I am sure that this will work, but would it be correct semantically? Thanks for the info. We covered
:). This article was written by Richard Clark.
…or at least that’s the impression I’ve got :). (From HTML5 Boilerplates), Also, while Bruce’s mum thanks you for complementing her photography, she apologies for the photo’s subject — sadly her son didn’t inherit her good looks ;). This should not be necessary when browsers implement
I don’t think it matters.
w3schools.com.
Regular readers will know that a new element was recently introduced, namely .
But the remaining options are too short to provide value. The element is optional and can appear before or after the content within the . A p element is flow content but not phrasing content. Offer Title Or a better question may be: The longer the broader development community, such as the HTMLWG, ignores accessibility, or thinks that others like the PFWG / WAI will take care of it for them, the longer we will need technologies like ARIA to fill in the blanks.
Traditionally, the author adds the documents to the “resource gallery” (to use a CMS term) and then links to them in an unordered list (if you’re lucky). This bit of the spec is quite fiddly, but there is a nice Venn diagram under Kinds of content in the Overview document which shows how the content types relate to eachother. You can also use , and remember to use < and > for brackets.
The alt attribute is almost always poorly written for screen readers providing bad UX. If were to be associated with , then it shouldn’t be contained by it.
HTML5 accessibility is not very well supported, it will be in the future, but ARIA works today. If you have multiple sized images that you want centered in a containing element but want the caption to be right (or left) justified with the varying image sizes will you STILL have to have a width declared? @Nathan — yep, the spec says “Content model: Flow content”, which is basically most elements, including
-
and etc.
It does impose some extra difficulties with wysiwyg editors and such, as I would suggest using the figure element for every image that could have a caption (future-proof coding and such!). Bobby: Just let me add this: the way the spec.
Yes, the feature in html5 is great, but it seems that few sites and blogs are using, here in Brazil (where I live), for example, few, if not none, blogs and websites use this feature and think it should use more, I always use this tag on my blogs and projects, trying to make the site more semantic as possible. It won’t hurt your site, it won’t hurt your users.
Reply. Most of these suggestions failed since there was no backwards compatibility for styling with CSS. Ahh I got. However I suspect that Visual Studio is the problem, so try a quick test in Notepad, and if so check for an update for Virtual Studio, or ask when they will add it. 2. The figure rule from Henri’s table does not appear to match up with the current draft. [img src=”mybook.png” alt=”Book title”] [img] < figcaption> hidden tagline Right?
The figure, its caption, and its contents are referenced as a single unit. Is it possible to do 3 (or more) images side by side with different captions centered underneath each image and all center on the page? figcaption can’t content with h1~h6 tags ? …then again it’s got to be A, an empty alt attribute is just so wrong. @Sergey – You’re probably right that you don’t need figure at all, but note that of your two options using figure, the first (link inside figure) is invalid in HTML5. In what situations or what is difference between using img & p vs figure & figcaption ?
Lets say I want to markup bird pictures each within a figure element, can I also include and audio tag of the bird’s call and If so, where? Where Steve and I disagree is about the verbose alt text in (A). , I can’t speak for all visually impaired people, but I’d rather have the gory detail than some vanilla PC description. I choose “C”… first I thought the right answer is “E”, but coding wise “E” becomes redundant using the and the “alt” property of ….. so I’ll go with “C”. “role=”presentation” removes the img from the accessible tree”.
Title
It may not always be appropriate to use the element, though. It seems to me that the question should be “what’s better for the user?” and the answer is “it depends”, because those pesky blind users will insist on not being an homogenous mass. Let’s start with option B.
[p]Some text. I was going to ask about the same question as @Dinis Correia did. You can check detailed explanation of figure and figcaption on html5doctor. I hadn’t realised this before Steve told me, hence the errata for my Introducing HTML5 chapter).
, I’ve been having a similar debate with Hixie http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0168.html. And yet the spec says that the is to be used for content that can be moved away into an appendix. [A] – The worst by far. I think I agree with the emerging consensus on A being the correct choice.
– crikey! . Definite improvement for quotes too.
, *Obviously, in the example, those tags should read and . so I’ll choose “E”.. I have no idea why I ended that with a capital E. Ignore it! Cliquez sur la bonne réponse ou saisissez la bonne réponse dans les zones prévues à cet effet. The figure and figcaption elements are two semantic elements that are often used together. Other content suitable for use in includes audio, video, charts (perhaps using
