W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Review of 3.15.1. The table element

From: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 23:52:26 +1000
Message-ID: <5f37426b0708230652p8b8456cs44ef49bf2703ab7d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>
Cc: gonchuki <gonchuki@gmail.com>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>

Why not borrow wording from WCAG? Better still, limit ourselves to a
short note regarding accessibility and link to the WCAG advice.

I'd like to see the HTML spec focus on HTML. WCAG focuses on
accessible authoring techniques. Strong links between the two will
provide a much better resource for authors reading either document.

On 8/23/07, Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
> gonchuki wrote:
> > A conformance tool could at least check the number of DOM nodes inside
> > table cells and raise a warning if above certain number. I mean, may
> > be a span or two are ok for visual formatting, but above that
> > threshold the conformance tool should raise a warning telling the
> > author to check that tables are not used for layout.
> On balance, I think a toning down is justified.  If a conformance
> criterion is not amenable to pass/fail validation, it should be
> re-expressed as a desideratum, with perhaps a (shared) footnote
> to the effect that it may be upgraded from "deprecated" to
> "disallowed" when AI has developed to the point at which its
> usage can be reliably detected by a programmable validator.
> Philip TAYLOR
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2007 13:52:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:25 UTC