W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2010

Re: some conformance questions

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:55:30 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTim7wqkebudCbzctsk5Q4SpITbeGi4c4DGDH68fn@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
>But there are plenty of legitimate tables around without headers. E.g.
magic squares:

So how many of the instances of tables without headers are legit 0.1%, 1%,

if the answer to this is at the lower end of the scale then it would be
reasonable to conclude that if a table without headers is checked by a
conformance checker , the use of the table is non conforming and should be
flagged as such , probably with a warning.


On 17 June 2010 10:39, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:25:02 +0200, Steven Faulkner <
> faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is there some kind of multiple-sentence-header abuse you are trying to
>>> combat? Why should we not allow it?
>> Not particularly I am trying to understand in general what makes some
>> things
>> a conformance error in HTMl5 and others not.
>> though in regards to tables, if there ARE no legit use cases for data
>> tables without headers it would  be a simple way to flag a conofmance
>> error for abuse of tables right?
> But there are plenty of legitimate tables around without headers. E.g.
> magic squares:
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_square
> --
> Anne van Kesteren
> http://annevankesteren.nl/

with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
Received on Thursday, 17 June 2010 09:56:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:10 GMT