W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > December 2009

Re: CHANGE PROPOSAL: Table Summary

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 07:19:08 -0600
Message-ID: <1c8dbcaa0912080519s57969f98j807b821b27b046be@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Cc: Matt Morgan-May <mattmay@adobe.com>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Roger Johansson <roger@456bereastreet.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
Hello Everyone,

I went back through the public-html-a11y email on table summary thread
trying to extract concerns (general and specific) [1] that may be
relevant to any usability evaluation goals [2]. So far I've found:

Matt's concerns [3] [4]:
* Will a table summary replacement that defaults to visible not be
used because it's presented visually?
* What is the best way to reconcile aesthetics and data with one another?
* If people are taught to write _good_ @summary values will they
write _bad_ summary values?
* Will people think to add a summary paragraph if they are they're not
prompted to do so by a tool?
* How can study data be fairly analyzed by humans who are frustratingly analog?

John's concerns [5]:
* Are facts based on public available data?
* What evidence is there that @summary causes *harm* to users?
* Is  meta-data better than no data?

Ian's concerns [6] [7]:
* Would a visible table summary help accessibility?
* Does a hidden table summary (summary attribute) harm accessibility?
* Does a hidden table summary (summary attribute) help accessibility?

Roger's concerns and criteria [8]:
* Do AT users  who use shortcuts to jump straight to the table miss
any information if the table summary information is provided in
paragraphs not explicitly associated with a table?
* What is the best way for authors to satisfy stakeholders aesthetics
of not having a table table summary information visible and still
making a table accessible?

Leif's concerns [9]:
* What kind of extra table summary information is needed for accessibility?
* What is the best way to add that information?
* What is the feasibility of a the task force doing test? Do we have
the needed resources?
* Can we include authors as well as participants in studies?
* Can goals be specified so everyone agrees upon them?
* How do we fairly interpretable outcomes?

Did I get any of this wrong? Are there additions or corrections? Are
there any other concerns? I can start a brainstorming page to track
this in the Wiki.

My concerns are similar to those above. The biggest one is:
* How can table summary be *improved*?

If it is decided we want to pursue this avenue, I have some 2002
usability testing planning documents on line which may be useful. They
include planning materials for usability testing goals, tasks,
scenarios, measures, participants, timelines, materials etc.

Best Regards,

[1] A concern is a question about usability.
[2] A goal is a declarative statement resulting from a question of
concern. A goal establishes an objective to measure.
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0003.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0008.html
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0004.html
[6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0002.html
[7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0045.html
[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0042.html
[9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0043.html

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 8 December 2009 13:19:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:27 UTC