W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: summary attribute required? history.

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 11:58:15 -0500 (EST)
To: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
cc: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0103051156020.4657-100000@tux.w3.org>
The words say, provide a summary (a short synopsis, precis, etc), and give,
as one example of how to do t in one language, the use of HTML's summary
attribute. I would also be looking for a summary in testing for triple-A, but
in reaching for it myself I prefer to have a caption element, and possibly
add additional information in a summary. (This is because I don't use layout
tables. If I did I would note that they are layout tables in the summary).

cheers

Charles McCN

On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Leonard R. Kasday wrote:

  Al wrote:
  quote
  The argument against requiring a value of the SUMMARY attribute per se for all
  tables is that the SUMMARY is supplementary to the caption element or TITLE
  attribute for the table.
  unquote

  However, WCAG 1.0 says

  quote
  5.5 Provide summaries for tables. [Priority 3] For example, in HTML, use
  the "summary" attribute of the TABLE element. Techniques for checkpoint 5.5
  unquote

  That seems to say that summary is required.

  Personally, I'd agree with Al that summary isn't always needed.  There's
  the case Al mentioned where  title and caption might suffice.  There's also
  another case: where the text of the document happens to describe the
  table.  In other words, I see summary like a longdesc: a longer explanation
  that isn't always needed.

  Anyway, the next time I'm rating a page for triple A, do I need to require
  summary?  I'd look to the folks doing HTML techniques to answer this for
  2.0... we can then issue an errata against 1.0 if necessary.

  In the meantime, I'm going to have to go by what I see as the plain meaning
  of the words and require a summary for triple A compliance even in cases
  where I have say that it isn't really necessary.  I hope this gets resolved
  before I run across this in a real case.

  Len
Received on Monday, 5 March 2001 11:58:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:09 GMT