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

Re: Proposed change to checkpoint 5.3

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 13:17:10 -0400 (EDT)
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
cc: WAI Markup Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9904201313560.10829-100000@tux.w3.org>
I don't think this can rate a P1. User Agents should not be playing a
guessing game - tables used for layout are a temporary hack which may
require users to play a guessing game while user agents do not support
proper presentation mechanisms. It seems unlikely to me that the presence
or absence of TH is a make or break issue for accessibility - it is only
there to make a guess more educated in any case.

Charles McCathieNevile

On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Jon Gunderson wrote:

  I would like to see a stronger statement of Priority 1 for proper use of TD
  and TH.  Based on the current Web Content guidelines this is really the
  only information currently available to user agents for determining whether
  a table is being used for layout or tabular data.  Without this information
  user agents need to play a guessing game on what a table is being used for.
  Jon
  
  
  
  At 11:13 AM 4/17/99 +1000, Jason White wrote:
  >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.
  > 
  Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
  Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
  Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
  University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
  1207 S. Oak Street
  Champaign, IL 61820
  
  Voice: 217-244-5870
  Fax: 217-333-0248
  E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
  WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
  	http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
  

--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA
Received on Tuesday, 20 April 1999 13:17:15 GMT

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