dita — archive

[Tom Magliery <ekimber@contrext.com>]

> Then the other question is whether or not the specialization is semantically consistent with the base, which is a more subjective question. But in this case, <div> has no semantic beyond "container" so hard not to be semantically consistent with it. Ditto for <area> specialized from <div>. Graydon's earlier point is that specializations of div therefore should not (or even "must not"?) have a semantic beyond "container", but it's certainly true that the area element has semantics beyond "container". Are there other specializations of div that we can look to as precedent? mag On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:14 PM Eliot Kimber < ekimber@contrext.com > wrote: [I sent this to Zoe yesterday but had intended to send to the main list] ï<div> should be the best choice but would need to think it through: <imagemap> allows <image> and <area> <area> is currently a specialization of <figgroup>. <figgroup> is essentially the semantic equivalent to <div> so it would make sense to also make <area> a specialization of <div>. <div> allows all the elements from which the subelements of <area> are specialized, so that works. One way to evaluate a specialization design is to generalize it back to the base types and verify that the result is still valid. If it is, then the specialization meets that requirement. So using <div> for <imagemap> and <area> definitely passes that test. Then the other question is whether or not the specialization is semantically consistent with the base, which is a more subjective question. But in this case, <div> has no semantic beyond "container" so hard not to be semantically consistent with it. Ditto for <area> specialized from <div>. Cheers, E. -- Eliot Kimber http://contrext.com ïOn 7/8/19, 8:30 PM, "Zoe Lawson" < dita@lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of zoelawson17@hotmail.com > wrote: Originally, <imagemap> was a specialization of <fig>. This means you cannot use an <imagemap> directly inside of a <fig>, which makes it complicated to add a title to your image. You can work around this by using a <div> inside of the <fig>, but that seems like an extra layer of complexity. If we change the specialization base of <imagemap> from <fig> to something slightly more generic such as <div>, that may simplify the adding of a title (or other content) around an <imagemap> in a <fig>. I would like some technical assistance determining which element makes the most sense to specialize from. Thanks, Zoà Lawson --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php