W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > May 2010

Re: CFC re ISSUE-32 "Table-Summary"

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Thu, 06 May 2010 09:35:03 +0100
Message-ID: <4BE27F37.9060100@cfit.ie>
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
CC: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On 06/05/2010 01:21, Ian Hickson wrote:
 > I object on the grounds that there's no evidence that there are authors
 > who:
 >   * have tables complicated enough that non-visual users need a
 >     description, and
 >   * are able to write a description, and
 >   * are not willing to expose this description to all users, and
 >   * are not willing to use CSS techniques or<details>  to hide the
 >     information from the default visual presentation, and
 >   * will remember to update the attribute when the table changes.
 > There is, however, ample evidence that authors who are convinced (by
 > advocacy) that they fall into the above situation in fact fail to fall
 > into it, and end up creating harmful content. There is also ample 
 > that having the attribute present encourages authors to include
 > descriptions when they are not necessary, wasting their time and the time
 > of their AT-using readers.
 > Therefore, having the attribute causes more harm than not having it.

Aside from any technical discussion on the pros and cons of the CFC for 
Issue 32, firstly I disagree with your points - A to E - and as for the 
last piece of prose, I am sorry, that is just plain doublespeak. [1]


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak
Received on Thursday, 6 May 2010 08:35:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:11 UTC