W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: linearized tables

From: Marcelo de Arruda <marruda@technomosaic.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 10:53:00 +0000
Message-ID: <38CE1A0C.F6F5B9E2@technomosaic.com>
To: thatch@us.ibm.com
CC: gv@trace.wisc.edu, "'Greg Lowney'" <greglo@microsoft.com>, "'Wendy A Chisholm'" <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, kasday@acm.org
Hello,

A suggestion as to how one might deal with linearization of tables is by
setting its attribute inside of the "table" tag.  For instance, I could use the
attribute "title=layout1" to define the table as serving layout purposes, and
"title=data1" defining tabular data content.

Marcelo de Arruda
--
Technical Team Coordinator
TechnoMOSAIC, LLC
marruda@technomosaic.com
phone: 765-525-4568
fax: 765-525-6165


thatch@us.ibm.com wrote:

> How do you distinguish tables used for layout and those for tabular data? I
> think the distinction is when the row-column position has meaning.
>
> TV listings, for example, are "tabular data." The layout of tabular data
> lets the sighted user observe the row-column semantics. Layout and tabular
> data get kind of mashed together.  I think (hope) no one is arguing that
> tabular data needs to linearize well.  Instead, use appropriate table
> markup, TH elements and headers attributes, summary attribute and caption
> element.
>
> The example of a form whose input elements are placed in a table with
> labels in the cells above is tabular data because row-column position
> carries meaning. Clearly tabular data is not restricted to numbers. TV
> Listings have very few numbers. The Form example is no less a table than
> the TV listings. The Form example is properly marked up if appropriate
> table markup is used. Of course the form can also be marked up with the
> LABEL element.
>
> My bottom line is that when row-column position carries meaning, then
> linearization is not relevant.
>
> Jim Thatcher
> IBM Accessibility Center
> (512)838-0432
> After 3/31/2000 jim@jimthatcher.com (512)306-0931
>
> "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu> on 03/13/2000 08:46:25 PM
>
> Please respond to gv@trace.wisc.edu
>
> To:   "'Greg Lowney'" <greglo@microsoft.com>, "'Wendy A Chisholm'"
>       <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> cc:   kasday@acm.org
> Subject:  RE: linearized tables
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> I think the problem is that most programs linearize by listing the items in
> the order they are appear in the HTML.  So labels above items would not
> linearize in any very usable fashion.
>
> This is not a problem with tables that present tabular information.  In
> that
> case - the column headers across the top (If appropriately marked) would be
> the proper way to lay out a table.  (especially since there are usually
> labels down the side too.)  Not that the linearization rule does not apply
> to tables used for tabular information.
>
> It WOULD be a good idea for programs that linearize tables to give the user
> the option to flip it top-for-side to see if it were easier to understand
> or
> use in that manner.  I don't know which ones do that though.   Anyone know
> of table linearizers with a flip layout function?
>
> Gregg
>
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Professor - Human Factors
> Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis.
> Director - Trace R & D Center
> Gv@trace.wisc.edu, http://trace.wisc.edu/
> FAX 608/262-8848
> For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:     w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]  On
> Behalf Of Greg Lowney
> Sent:     Monday, March 13, 2000 11:46 AM
> To:  Wendy A Chisholm; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Cc:  kasday@acm.org
> Subject:  RE: linearized tables
>
> Hi Len, I don't necessarily disagree that it should be priority 1 to make
> tables understandable when linearized, but I don't like the example: "a
> form
> laid out in a table with field labels on the top row and corresponding
> fields on the bottom row."
>
> I believe that complies with the guideline that requires the table to make
> sense when linearized. It is normal table behavior for the first row to
> label the entire columns, so from the standpoint of the guideline regarding
> linearization it should be OK to create a table whose first row contained
> labels for the form controls in lower rows. The responsibility then is on
> the agent doing the linearization to clearly express the labeling
> relationship between the column header and the cell contents. That's
> equally
> true whether the cell contains a control or any other content. Therefore I
> don't see the example as violating this guideline.
>
> However, the example would violate a second guideline, which is to ensure
> that implicitly-associated labels are properly positioned. That is Pri 2
> because it's assumed that the author will comply with the third guideline,
> that of providing explicitly-associated labels.
>
>      Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wendy A Chisholm [mailto:wendy@w3.org]
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 12:08 PM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Cc: kasday@acm.org
> Subject: Fwd: linearized tables
>
> >Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:39:32 -0500 (EST)
> >X-Sender: kasday@pop3.concentric.net
> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2
> >Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:41:49 -0500
> >To: "wai-wcag-editor@w3.org" <wai-wcag-editor@w3.org>
> >From: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
> >Cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
> >Subject: linearized tables
> >Resent-From: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
> >X-Mailing-List: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> archive/latest/1144
> >X-Loop: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
> >Sender: w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org
> >Resent-Sender: w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org
> >
> >WCAG says
> >
> >5.3 Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when
> >linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an
> >alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version). [Priority 2]
> >
> >This means that someone could use tables for layout in way that the page
> >makes no sense and is not usable by any of todays user agents... but still
> >get an A conformance rating, because this is only priority 2.
> >
> >For example, if there's a form laid out in a table with field labels on
> >the top row and corresponding fields on the bottom row.
> >
> >I think the checkpoint needs to be Priority 1.
> >
> >Len
> >
> >-------
> >Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
> >Institute on Disabilities/UAP, and
> >Department of Electrical Engineering
> >Temple University
> >423 Ritter Annex, Philadelphia, PA 19122
> >
> >kasday@acm.org
> >http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday
> >
> >(215) 204-2247 (voice)
> >(800) 750-7428 (TTY)
>
> --
> wendy a chisholm
> world wide web consortium
> web accessibility initiative
> madison, wi usa
> tel: +1 608 663 6346
> /--
Received on Tuesday, 14 March 2000 10:51:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:01 GMT