W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > July 2003

Re: table type/class=layout (was: RE: [#293] Summary for tables)

From: Toby A Inkster <tobyink@goddamn.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 17:30:59 +0100
To: "Jewett, Jim J" <jim.jewett@eds.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org, "'Jens Meiert'" <jens.meiert@erde3.com>, Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
Message-ID: <20030717163059.GA5476@ophelia.goddamn.co.uk>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:01:26PM -0400, Jewett, Jim J wrote:
| I will submit a patch to plucker (an offline web reader) the 
| first time I notice this on even a single site that I regularly 
| pluck.  It won't take much longer for proxomitron rulesets.   
| I suspect that AvantGo, iSilo, and Opera's smallscreen mode
| would also support it fairly quickly, if it starts to show up
| in a fair number of pages.

Except it would barely show up at all, because most of the people who
would care enough to use title="layout" (or whatever) are already
using CSS for layout.

I don't think any such code meaning "this table is for layout"
should be introduced, as it only legitimises the use of tables
for layout, which is a semantic nightmare.

-- 
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS | mailto:tobyink@goddamn.co.uk | pgp:0x6A2A7D39
    aim:inka80 | icq:6622880 | yahoo:tobyink | jabber:tai@jabber.linux.it
            http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ | "You've got spam!"
                             playing://(nothing)

Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:31:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:56 GMT