W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: Proposed change to checkpoint 5.3

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:13:56 +1000 (AEST)
To: WAI Markup Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.990417110656.11894B-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>
I concur with Charles' proposal, with the following reservations:

1. The non-use of TH to convey presentational effects should have a
priority 2 rating, as it provides a means whereby user agents can reliably
distinguish data tables from layout tables, and also encourages the proper
use of structural markup.

2. I would prefer the condition that tables be used for layout only until
style sheet positioning is adequately supported, to be explicitly stated
in the checkpoint, thus making it time dependent.

Eric's proposal is to similar effect. I would emphasize however that the
inclusion of proper structural markup is a priority 2 requirement. The
inability to determine the structure of a document (headings, lists,
paragraphs, etc.) is a major access barrier, as it means that the said
structure will be evident in a visual setting (due to the presentational
markup comprised by the layout tables) but but not in an auditory or
braille setting; in this fundamentally undermines the concept of equal
access to the document. Access (at more than the minimum threshhold level
established by the "A" rating) involves access not only to the text, but
also to the structural and semantic distinctions communicated by the
formatting. Thus, the structural markup is needed, at a priority 2 level,
to ensure that appropriate auditory/braille/handheld-device formatting can
be provided by the user agent, with the aid, where possible, of style
sheets.
Received on Friday, 16 April 1999 21:14:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:46:59 GMT