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

Re: PF Response: @Summary

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 17:08:16 -0400
To: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, 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>
Message-ID: <20090707210816.GR3184@sonata.rednote.net>
Jim Jewett writes:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Janina Sajka<janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> > Henri Sivonen writes:
> >> On Jul 6, 2009, at 20:50, Joshue O Connor wrote:
> 
> >>> [Considering Gez Lemon's example, available at
> >>>  http://juicystudio.com/wcag/tables/complexdatatable.html ]
> 
> 
> >>> For a suitable @summary overview you could say something like:
> >>>
> >>> <table summary="A complex table of two halves.
> >>>  Firstly, there are 7 columns with the headings
> >>>  Child Investment, Type, Status, Allocation,
> >>>  Total Cost of Ownership, Return on Investment,
> >>>  Net Present Value, with their corresponding
> >>> values in rows beneath them. The table is then
> >>> followed by a column called Property that has
> >>> two sections of sub-headings of Budgeted,
> >>> Actual and Forecasted with their corresponding
> >>> running cost values for three weekly periods
> >>> starting from the 12th of December 2005 to the
> >>> 26th">.
> 
> >> I observe that the actual summary looks like this:
> 
> >>> <table summary="Child investment portfolios
> >>>  with budgeted, actual and forecast running
> >>>  costs for particular dates">
> 
> >> It's much shorter, and it's caption-like.
> 
> > Please notice that your "caption" text says nothing
> > about how the data is structured. That's important,
> > very important. Josh's summary has
> > that information. Your caption does not.
> 
> I think most people agree that the structural information shouldn't be
> in the summary, but may be useful to some people.
> 
No, that's not correct.

The structural data SHOULD be in the summary. Text as in the example
above:

*	complex table of two halves
*	seven columns ...
*	followed by a column ... that has two sections of sub headings

You wouldn't want that in captions. It's necessary information in
summary.

> The questions are:
> 
> (1)  Can the browser determine this structural information automatically?
> 
> (2)  Can the browser do it well enough that summaries should always be
> automated, so as to benefit from standardization?
> 
> I'm not sure exactly what structural information is needed, but if
> some *is* needed here, then it looks like an automated (User Agent)
> process could often do better than even an expert (Author) does in
> practice -- and so maybe the UA guidelines are what should be
> specified.

PF responded on these questions formally. We would appreciate the
basic human courtessy of acknowledgment.  If you don't like what we said, please
speak to that. But kindly don't simply ignore us.

http://www.w3.org/mid/20090604000217.GA2789@sonata.rednote.net

Janina



> 
> -jJ

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.202.595.7777;
		sip:janina@CapitalAccessibility.Com
Partner, Capital Accessibility LLC	http://CapitalAccessibility.Com

Marketing the Owasys 22C talking screenless cell phone in the U.S. and Canada
Learn more at http://ScreenlessPhone.Com

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org

Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 21:09:43 GMT

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