W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2011

(unknown charset) Re: ISSUE-155 counter proposal

From: (unknown charset) Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 19:51:51 +0100
To: (unknown charset) Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: (unknown charset) public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110323195151026606.ed222fda@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Ian Hickson, Wed, 23 Mar 2011 17:59:46 +0000 (UTC):
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> 
>> What use is there in having non-CSS UAs that are able to draw borders, 
>> if authors aren't allowed to use the very HTML feature that triggers 
>> them to actually draw them?
> 
> The HTML feature that should trigger them to actually draw table borders 
> is simply <table>.

I agree. But what about the layout table reality? E.g. try to set all 
the border attributes of this page to "1" and see: 
http://www.ist-inc.com  Which browser vendor wants to hurt itself that 
much?

It seems outright out of tune with - recently made permitted - <table 
role=presentation> to require that <table> triggers borders. And, 
regardless, if it is self-evident that tables SHOULD have borders, then 
HTML5 should say it.

If tables ought to have borders, then it is the lack of borders that is 
presentational. Thus, to say that border="1" is RECOMMENDED on all 
*data tables*, but be silent w.r.t. @border on *layout tables*, seems 
like a good option. @border doesn't become more or less presentational 
by such a recommendation. Judged by its visual effect, it is the lack 
of @border and border="0" that *really* is presentational. (OK, setting 
the border to a value larger than 1 also seems presentational.)
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 18:52:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:23 UTC