- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 07:01:02 -0600
- To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Roger Johansson <roger@456bereastreet.com>
Ian wrote: > Nobody has collected equivalent data showing summary="" is useful at > improving accessibility in practice, Last month Roger Johansson asked on his blog, "Do you find table summaries helpful?"[1]. and received three responses from screen reader users. Some questions: Would it in-scope for this task force to do similar survey of screen reader users on a wider scale? Would such a survey help bring this issue to resolution? If so, are there any accessibility task force members willing to collaborate on such a survey? Could the W3C WBS survey tool be used for such a survey? Roger was the original person to raise the table summary issue on May 1, 2007. [2] Best Regards, Laura [1] http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200911/do_you_find_table_summaries_helpful/ [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007May/thread.html#msg12 On 12/5/09, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Laura Carlson wrote: >> John Foliot wrote: >> >> It comes down to two perspectives: Universal Design versus >> >> Accommodation features. In a perfect world, Universal Design would >> >> solve all problems, as the Design would be, well, Universal. >> >> However, when Universal Design fails is there another way forward? >> >> The answer is via Accommodation features. @summary is one such >> >> Accommodation feature - it exists when other 'solutions' are either >> >> not viable or wanted, for whatever reason. Matt May and Cynthia >> >> Shelly are two senior developers who have specifically noted in the >> >> context of *this thread* that they have experienced, first hand, the >> >> tug and pull of Accessibility Requirements versus other Business and >> >> Aesthetic considerations, and they, like I, have experienced more >> >> than once the defeat of Accessibility enhancements (or even basic >> >> needs) to the Trump Card of other voices at the decision table. >> >> Having solutions such as @summary in the developer's toolbox provides >> >> an additional option when options are required - it allows for a >> >> compromise solution that you have not offered in any other way. >> >> Ian Hickson wrote: >> > I'm not arguing with the principle; I'm arguing with this application >> > of the principle. >> >> If I recall correctly, Ian didn't you argue the same against restoring >> the table headers attribute for a year and a half and yet ended up >> restoring @headers in the spec making it conforming? >> >> If that is correct from your perspective, what is the difference between >> the @headers issue [1] and the @summary issue [2]? > > Ben Millard collected convincing data showing that tables existed that > benefitted from the headers="" attribute, and that assistive technologies > could not derive the same information from the existing markup. There was > also evidence showing that headers="" misuse was relatively easily > algorithmically detectable, such that it didn't harm users. Finally, the > feature doesn't cause harm to non-AT users. > > Nobody has collected equivalent data showing summary="" is useful at > improving accessibility in practice, and people _have_ collected data > showing that it is harmful to both AT and non-AT users (in different > ways). > > >> They are both accessibility accommodations. What is the difference in >> applying the principle in the two cases? > > The principle is that accessibility accommodations (meaning features that > authors have no motivation to use _other_ than improving the experience of > AT users) should be a last resort, to be used when there is evidence that > their use would improve matters, that their design is likely to lead to > acceptably frequent good usage, that there are no better solutions, and > that their introduction would not lead to a reduction in the experience > for either AT or non-AT users. > > Evidence was collected showing that the conditions apply for headers="". > Evidence was collected showing that the conditions did not apply for > summary="". > > That's the only difference. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Sunday, 6 December 2009 13:01:38 UTC