- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:36:34 +0100
- To: Steve Axthelm <steveax@pobox.com>
- CC: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>
Leif Halvard Silli 2009-03-02 00.48:
> Steve Axthelm 2009-03-01 23.16:
>> On 2009-02-27 Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote:
>> Keeping @summary and @caption separate and retaining the the rendering
>> differences gives me the flexibility to add valuable metadata in
>> places where I would _not_, given all other considerations, otherwise
>> be able to add it.
>
> If this was related to caption@summary, then the argument is that it is
> easier to convince third parties about <table summary="Text."> than
> about <caption summary="Text."></caption>.
>
> Yes, one problem with caption@summary is: what if the site has
> caption{height:1em}, then you will have to e.g. apply <caption
> style="height:0" summmary="Text."> to hide the box of the caption.
>
> But this can also be an advantage. It becomes easy to check which tables
> you added a caption@summary for.
>
> caption[summary]{background:red;height:1em}
Giving it further thought: It seems to me to be *an advantage* if
adding @summary comes with a tiny "cost". It would ensure that
authors do not add it for no reason (summary="", summary="Layout",
summary="Caption", summary="Duplicate Caption.".)
Also, the WCAG 2 norms speak about the need for both @summary and
<caption.> And if you work under such constraints, then you cannot
fullfill those norms anyhow. Instead, you run the risk of filling
@summary with stuff that belongs inside <caption>.
@summary should not help you avoiding the real issue.
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 2 March 2009 04:37:23 UTC