- From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:43:15 +0000
- To: Gez Lemon <g.lemon@webprofession.com>
- CC: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
Gez Lemon wrote: > Ultimately, I think our different points of view are based around > whether the summary should provide a concise overview of the > structure, or whether it's a long description for the data table. I'm > of the opinion it's the former, and respect that you and many others > are of the opinion that it's the latter. I don't see why it can't be both (as needed) - relatively trivial to make this is the case /but/ what I really want to know is.. :-) 1) Are we missing a trick by not bringing an element to the table (in terms of better /potential/ etc)? 2) Will the @summary attribute stand the test of time with it limited ability? 3) Is there now really just an opportunity to do /more/ with @summary? 4) and finally could this potential/change/pimping of @summary as is, be detrimental to the current user groups who do find it useful? What do y'all think? Cheers Josh
Received on Friday, 26 February 2010 10:43:52 UTC