- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 01:55:48 +0100
- To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Cc: 'Jonas Sicking' <jonas@sicking.cc>, 'Denis Boudreau' <dboudreau@webconforme.com>, 'HTML Accessibility Task Force' <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, 'HTML WG Public List' <public-html@w3.org>
John Foliot, Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:50:00 -0800 (PST): > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> >> It is a general problem with the current >> draft that the only thing that is specifically dedicated to explain the >> table structure, is an obsoleted attribute - @summary. > > Point of clarification Leif, @summary was removed from the list of > obsolete attributes (http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#obsolete), > although the draft still treats it as a second-class citizen by suggesting > that it needs to generate a warning whenever used, even if/when it might > be used appropriately and correctly. OK, so I was wrong in perceiving it as if Jonas was suggesting to obsolete it again, in favour of ARIA, I suppose. Thanks for keeping the debate on track! The real issue then is whether the advice (the warning in the validator) to use another feature rather than @summary increases accessibility. In the evaluation of that question, we are then faced with the fact that WCAG 2.0 requires that table summaries can be programmatically determined, and that @summary so far still is the only HTML 5 feature which can be programmatically determined as a table summary. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 7 January 2010 00:56:29 UTC