- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:10:52 -0800 (PST)
- To: "'Gez Lemon'" <g.lemon@webprofession.com>, "'Gregory J. Rosmaita'" <oedipus@hicom.net>
- Cc: <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Gez Lemon wrote: > > Excuse the top post, but I want to talk generally about your email > about whether summary should be an attribute or an element. Firstly, > thank you for your considered email explaining why you think summary > would be better as an element. I agree that this needs to be addressed > before coming up with solutions. I agree Gez, and in a bit of shameless self-promotion, I just posted a very brief blog posting about this very topic: http://john.foliot.ca. I welcome your thoughts, as well as the thoughts of others. I personally like Cynthia's proposal, as it addresses the *problem* at a level that accepts that the issue does affect more than just screen reader users. It also seeks to extend the solution, while also acknowledging the significant resistance to @summary. As some-one once said to me, you can be right, or you can be married. Personally, I prefer to focus on how we support the end users, rather than the specific technique involved - if the <details> proposal delivers on the solution, but meets less resistance than @summary, the end user still wins, no? > > I don't believe that summary should be an element, as it's supposed to > be concise overview of the structure for people who are unable to > determine the structure visually. One of the points I touch on in the posting is that cognitive studies have shown that lists are easier to 'consume' than even paragraphs. An attribute couldn't take on a list, an element could. (lists are also generally quite concise) > If the reason for making it an > element is that authors can provide richer markup, then I think we're > definitely outside the territory of a concise overview of the > structure of a data table, and more into summary being a long > description of the table. I think making this content material that is inside of an element allows authors a level of creativity in making that content available to all users, not just those who have AT wired to extract @summary. > > Anyway, it will be interesting to see whether people regard the > summary attribute as a means of providing a concise overview of the > structure, or whether they regard it as a long description of the > table. "Concise" will be defined by the author, whether it is inserted as an attribute value or as an element value. Ensuring conciseness is not something that I think we want to mandate programmatically (I'm thinking of shades of the Twitter 140 char. debate) JF
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 23:11:27 UTC