W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2008

Re: function and impacts (was: @scope and @headers reform)

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:45:54 +0100
Message-ID: <48D8E502.3020708@cfit.ie>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, Al Gilman <alfred.s.gilman@ieee.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>

Henri Sivonen wrote:
> For the use cases your clients have, would it be necessary to 
> use/recommend headers/id if browsers implemented the Smart Headers 
> algorithm Ben mentioned and reported those associations to AT?

I don't know yet. I am not sure that it is the right solution.

For the record, if a new authoring method works (i.e is well, supported, 
easy to author/understand etc) I have no problem recommending it. With 
this issue I am very concerned with legacy use but I do concede that if 
a solution is semantically superior at some stage a clear break must be 
made in favour of it.

But this is not a black and white issue, there are many shades of grey. 
For example, support by AT for @scope is practically non-existent. 
Anecdotally, it seems to me that many tables that use @scope just happen 
to coincide in their design to how the screen readers heuristic 
evaluation understands the content pattern, rather than because @scope 
had been used to mark up the content.

So I guess, it doesn't pay to think in terms of absolutes.

Cheers

Josh
Received on Tuesday, 23 September 2008 12:46:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:23 GMT