Re: Defect 13174

On 2011-11-10, at 5:59 AM, Léonie Watson wrote:

> Rich,
>  
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi
>  
>     Realised today that this had completely disappeared off my radar. It looks as though the bug has been closed fixed, and that the spec will be updated to allow flow content (with certain restrictions).
>  
> "Rationale: I've allowed all flow content except <header>, <footer>, heading,
> and sectioning content, based on the discussions above."
>  
>     The example that seems to have been particularly persuasive is on this page:
> http://cdl.ru/categories_in_item.mhtml?CatID=3&ShortID=945
>     I'm not sure what makes this example compelling. It strikes me that the <th> content would be better represented as part of the table content instead.
>  
>     The code example that was filed with the bug seems to re-enforce the idea that design is the deciding requirement, not semantics:
>  
> <th>
>     <dl>
>         <dt>Actual header</dt>
>         <dd>Additional content that, by visual design,
>         cannot be represented as a separate table cell</dd>
>     </dl>
> </th>
>  
>     Think we should consider re-opening this bug? The user experience (for AT users at least) if block level content is allowed inside a <th> isn't likely to be good IMHO.

Can you give more details about where you see problems for the user experience of AT users?

I just prepared a simple two column table with a header row and a data row. In the header is a <dl>. Using JAWS 13 + Firefox 8.0:

1. Using 't' to skip to the table, JAWS reads 'Table with 2 columns and 2 rows, column 1 row 1. Definition list of 1 items. Foo, bar bar bar'.
2. When i navigate to the next column JAWS reads similarly.
3. When I navigate across the data row JAWS flattens the block structure (doesn't read 'definition list') but still reports all content in the header.

Now I do think that this is a silly idea, I don't see an actual use-case for block level content in a <th> cell, but I don't know that I see a big problem for AT users.

Thanks,
Everett

Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 11:15:08 UTC