W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > July 2009

Re: PF Response: @Summary

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:53:33 +0100
Message-ID: <4A53292D.3020309@cfit.ie>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "wai-liaison@w3.org" <wai-liaison@w3.org>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, HTML WG Public List <public-html@w3.org>
Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> <table summary="Child investment portfolios with budgeted, actual and
>> forecast running costs for particular dates">
> 
> 
> It's much shorter, and it's caption-like.

Agreed, so it could be improved. Assessing this issue is qualitative, it
is also subjective. There is no absolute ruling as to what is, or isn't
/correct/. What is important is that the mechanism exists in the first
place and in the final analysis it is the authors discretion that needs
to be exercised.

> I think this anecdotal case study supports the notion that @summary
> isn't actually used as prescribed--not even by experts.

You could take that view, but it doesn't progress the argument. The
point is moot.

Cheers

Josh
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 10:58:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:25 GMT