Just an impression of mine: I am surprised to see the meanings of DT
and DD elements, when they are children of FIGURE, as they are.
I would expect them used just in opposite way. The logic of mine is
like this:
In case of using these elements as children of DL, DT has the role of
"term", "general name", "attribute" from the attribute-value pair,
etc. and DD has the role of extension, explanation, something
additional, variable, or just more specific. The DT-DD in DL
relationship hopefully might be described as similar to heading-
following content relationship.
In case of DT/DD in FIGURE, I would expect the same approach. But the
current specification describes these element oppositely: DT carries
the meaning of description while DD contains the "primary" content.
Since this state makes almost no sense for me, I would really like to
hear the way *you* look at FIGURE's children (and understand)... Thanks.
Peter
