W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: Evaluating Web sites: Lynx and data tables

From: Jean-Marie D'Amour <jmdamour@videotron.ca>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 11:48:20 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Chuck Letourneau <cpl@starlingweb.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org

Hello Chuck,

I agree with your Note.

For now, the best tool to test complex tables in the real world is Home 
Page Reader, except for axis.

Personnaly, I ceased to use Lynx for testing since Opera 6. I can made all 
tests with Opera or HPR. I have no objection to maintain Lynx in the 
document but i don't see how we can recommand a different usage for the 
comprehensive evaluation.


Jean-Marie D'Amour

A 11:08 2002-05-30, Chuck Letourneau a écrit :
>This change log entry is clipped from 
>and refers to the use of LYNX
>- start of clipping -
>*       explain more about what to look for in code when reviewing data 
>tables in lynx [20011030]
>[from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-eo-editors/2001Oct/0009.html]
>         [20020426] add a Note in #2, "don't use lynx on data tables." 
> (provide a link to somewhere where it's defined)
>- end of clipping -
>I think that simply stating, "don't use lynx on data tables" is not the 
>solution to this change request.
>The "problem" with using Lynx to evaluate the accessibility of data tables 
>arises because it does not (in the release I use) expose accessible markup 
>that an author may have added (i.e. headers, id, scope, etc.) that 
>(theoretically) make the table accessible to web agents that support such 
>On the other hand, LYNX can still be used to show whether an author has 
>designed a table to make sense when linearized.
>Therefore I propose that something like the following note be added to 
>both the preliminary and comprehensive sections (links to checkpoints 
>could be added):
>- start of note -
>NOTE: LYNX cannot be used to verify compliance with WCAG Priority 1 
>checkpoints 5.1 and 5.2 .   To do so, use a Web agent or assistive tool 
>that can interpret advanced table markup.  If such a tool is not 
>available, manually inspect the source code to determine if advanced table 
>markup has been used.  Then, when a suitable tool becomes available, 
>revisit the tables to ensure that the markup is reporting properly.  LYNX 
>can, however, be used to verify compliance with WCAG Priority 2 checkpoint 
>- end of note -
>Comment 1:  I am not certain that any tools fully (or consistently) 
>support all advanced table mark up yet.  Thus it is doubtful whether even 
>visual inspection of code is entirely useful since we are essentially 
>guessing how the markup might be interpreted by some future tool.  This is 
>an enduring problem for people trying to achieve Double-A.
>Comment 2: All this begs another question: should we distinguish between 
>how we recommend the use of LYNX in a preliminary review and in a 
>comprehensive review?
>Discussion would be appreciated.
>Chuck Letourneau
>Starling Access Services
>"Access A World Of Possibility"

Jean-Marie D'Amour M.Éd.
CAMO pour personnes handicapées
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 11:49:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:49 UTC