- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:05:06 +0200
- To: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "John Foliot" <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Cc: "'Jonas Sicking'" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "'David Singer'" <singer@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:49:19 +0200, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: >> The specific functionality it >> seeks to address it delivers in spades: as the PF WG noted, "Summary >> serves a need, and serves it well. It is familiar to users. It is >> supported in browsers. It is properly utilized on many web sites which >> strive to be accessible." > > What's the "serves it well" conclusion based on? The evidence at > http://philip.html5.org/data/table-summary-values-dotbot.html doesn't > appear to support the conclusion at all. > > From the evidence, it seems that: > 1) @summary mostly contains bogus data > 2) when it does contain non-bogus data, the data it contains is short > and caption-like and not of the kind shown in the example I quoted from > your email above. I looked through the list, and found just *one* that is somewhat of that kind (and is not a layout table), which is: "A table with two columns listing title, author, date, source, subject headings and comments for selected newspaper articles" http://www.santacruzpl.org/history/clippingfile/cliplist.php?page=3&subjhead2=621&newspaper=&datelimit= Although the table seems simple enough to not actually need the summary. The table can even be linearized without information loss. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 01:06:07 UTC