W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: HTML Table Markup

From: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:38:01 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <200409130838.i8D8c2vs004227@asterix.andreasen.se>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

On 12 Sep, Phill Jenkins wrote:

> No.  Could we agree that a simple 3x2 table is not a "data" table, but is 
> in fact just a layout table?  Even though it has some names and phone

  No, we cannot - and should not - agree that any, generic, 3x2 table is
  not a data table. The fact is that the moment you put <table> in your
  code, you ARE creating a data table.

  Anything else would be illogical, make no sense, and be inconsistent.
  I fail to see why this is such a problem. Table-based, or more
  correctly *grid* based layouts, are, in the context of the web, only
  needed for visual purposes. We really don't need to keep wandering
  down that path.

  Can we once and for all *end* this discussion ? Tables are for tabular
  data; regardless. Let's just leave it at that. It *is* 2004, and this
  discussion should have been left in the dark 90ies.

  If an automated checker encounters a <table> without any <th>, then we
  flag that as (a) potential incorrect use of tables, and (b) missing
  table headers.



> numbers in it doesn't require it to have heading to be understood, just as 
> long as the name and phone number are in the same row - that's all that is 
> required for the sighted and screen reader users to make sense out of it.

  That's all *you* need to make sense of it. Are you certain you wish to
  speak for every user, regardless of ability, on the topic ? I
  certainly don't feel up to it.

-- 
 -    Tina Holmboe                    Greytower Technologies
   tina@greytower.net                http://www.greytower.net/
   [+46] 0708 557 905
Received on Monday, 13 September 2004 08:38:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:44 UTC