W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > July 2004


From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:24:21 +0300 (EEST)
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0407282010160.28284@korppi.cs.tut.fi>

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Ian Hickson wrote:

> > - - The markup
> > language specification should define the meanings of elements and
> > attributes, not the way they are processed.
> It should do both, if it wants interoperability.

So you mean XHTML should be both declarative and procedural?
That leads to more problems than I can imagine.

> > Do you mean [the summary element] should be treated as a <caption> of
> > second grade?
> No; I mean it would be rendered instead of the table content. That, at
> least, is my reading of the spec's vague definition.

That's interesting; I could not have imagined such an interpretation.
I can see no statement suggesting that table content be not rendered,
though a speech browser, for example, would surely need to apply different
rendering and might work interactively, presenting only those cells that
the user asks for. What would be the point of presenting a text that is
"a summary of the table's purpose and structure" if you are not presenting
the table itself at all? I can't see how this would mean that the summary
is an alt-like _replacement_ for a table. The description is vague, but
not _that_ vague. Considering the example in the XHTML 2.0 draft,
the text "This table shows the number of times we needed to edit
this part of XHTML each week." is completely pointless if the tabular data
itself will not be presented to the user.

Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 13:24:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:08 UTC