- From: Duff Johnson <duff@duff-johnson.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 08:56:51 -0400
- To: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote: > Yes, correct use of artifacts would absolutely be required. It is my > experience that pagination artifacts must be labeled as such so they can > be displayed when the document is reflowed. Incorrect artifact > identification could remove headers/footers from reflowed documents. Yes, agreed. > I would certainly agree any running headers and footer that repeat a title > already exposed in the logical structure (e.g. on the first page or in the > document title) can safely be made artifacts. In cases where they contain > a title that is not already in the logical tree, I generally recommend the > first occurrence be placed in the logical structure tags tree and all > others be made artifacts. That seems like it would be a quite unusual use-case, but I do take your point… Duff.
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 12:57:21 UTC