W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Summary of Thursday's IRC conversation about @summary

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 14:21:13 -0700
Message-ID: <63df84f0906051421t13a4fe53y91bc30c1873436cc@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:22 PM, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu> wrote:
> Shelley Powers wrote:
>>
>> The other concern expressed in the IRC, rather emphatically, too, if one
>> looks at the exclamation points, is the fact that we don't see
>> widespread use of @summary after ten years! Half the web! (Those are
>> more or less direct quotes from the discussion.)
>>
>> Of course, I'm not an accessibility expert, just an interested
>> bystander, but I've noticed that--and this is unfortunate--changes in
>> general behavior in order to provide support for a minority, in this
>> case those with physical challenges, tends to happy very, very slowly.
>
>
> It is also important to note that the PF-WG specifically wrote:
>
> *       We reject the argument that summary should be removed from the
> HTML
> *       specification because it is not implemented on most web sites. We
> note
> *       that accessibility is poorly supported on most web sites. The
> wider
> *       web is not an example of good practice.
>
> Time and time again, it appears that the HTML WG fail to embrace this
> truism.

Can you point to where someone made this argument?

The argument that I hear most often is that on the pages where
@summary *is* used, it has not been used correctly. For example, as I
understood it, that was the argument made in [1].

/ Jonas

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0173.html
Received on Friday, 5 June 2009 21:22:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:04 UTC