[Bug 24679] Addition and iprovements to the table over (non-)layout table heuristics

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24679

steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |NEEDSINFO

--- Comment #5 from steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> ---

(In reply to Leif Halvard Silli from comment #4)
> (In reply to steve faulkner from comment #3)
> 
> > Status: needsinfo
> > Change Description: no change
> > Rationale: a number of assertions are made about the usefulness of
> > attributes to indicate whether a table is a data table or not, please
> > re-open the bug when you have provided some quantitative data to support
> > these assertions.
> 
> I am not a mechanical duck that does whatever I am told. I need to
> understand why am supposed to do something.
> 
> You ask me to provide quantitative data. Please convince why only
> quantitative data matters. For instance, it borders on absurd to ask for
> quantitative data for why table@sortable should not count as evidence for
> non-layout table.
> 
> Further more, as this this bug also points to table@border, based on a
> collection of data provided by yourself, be aware that you with the above
> statement also dismisses your own data.
> 
> I reopened this bug to have you
>  1) reevaluate wheter only quantiative data matters
>  2) to have provide an evaluation of the claims made.

EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the Editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the Tracker Issue; or you may create a Tracker Issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:

   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: needsinfo
Change Description: no change
Rationale: a number of assertions are made about the usefulness of attributes
to indicate whether a table is a data table or not, please re-open the bug when
you have provided some quantitative data to support these assertions.

For table@sortable we have no known implementations or known usage data, when
information on either of these is available feel free to re-open.

"Regarding table@rules, table@frame: HTML4 had table@rules and table@frame,
both of which should coount as indication (in an heuristic analysis) that the
table is a non-layout-table."

Have these been shown to have been used on data tables with more frequency than
on non data tables. have they been used with sufficient frequency that they
provide a useful heuristic, or would the addition of checking for use of such a
feature add unnecessary complexity without benefit?  if you have new
information to answers such questions please re-open.

in regards to border i earlier opened a separate bug
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24678

"Regarding td@axis (and th@axis ?): HTML4 had the td@axis, which was for use in
data tables. Evidence: This is a feature for data tables."

my understanding is that the usage of this attribute was negligible, if you
have information to the contrary it may be worth adding, if so please re-open


"Regarding a number of other attributes: If <table>, <tr>, <tbody>, <td> etc
includes a @lang attribute, likelyhood is that it is a non-layout table. This
claim is based on deduction. Evidence: When @lang is added, one should think
that the use of tables is a conscious choice and not just a result taking
advantage of the layout grid effects of tables."

the reasoning doesn't follow, for me. Providing information on use of @lang on
data tables vs non data tables would be a useful data point, if you have some
please re-open.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 15 February 2014 17:43:26 UTC