[Bug 24679] New: Addition and iprovements to the table over (non-)layout table heuristics

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24679

            Bug ID: 24679
           Summary: Addition and iprovements to the table over
                    (non-)layout table heuristics
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: PC
               URL: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/tabular-d
                    ata.html#attr-table-border
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: a11y
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: HTML5 spec
          Assignee: dave.null@w3.org
          Reporter: xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no
        QA Contact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: eoconnor@apple.com, faulkner.steve@gmail.com,
                    master.skywalker.88@gmail.com, mike@w3.org,
                    public-html-admin@w3.org,
                    public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org, robin@w3.org,
                    rubys@intertwingly.net,
                    xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no

PROPOSAL: Improve the table that describes the heuristics for determening
whether tables are layout tables or non-layout tables by adding more attributes
(e.g. table@sortable, table@rules, table@frame, td@axis, etc) and verifying
that the effects already described are accurate.

SITUATION: The table basically lists some attribtues, and describe each
attribute’s most probable effect in heuristic analysis. Both conforming and
non-conforming attributes ar listed. And for the conforming attributes, both
confonforming values (e.g. border=1) and non-conforming values (e.g. border=0)
are listed.

NEW INFO:

Data regarding tabl@border: In bug 24647, 7th comment, Steve provided some data
which he claims questions that the best heuristic effect of table@border=1 is
that it is a non-layout tabel
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24647#c7>. However, in comment
number 13, 15, 16, 17 and 20, I analysed some of Steve’s data and concluded
that it included many incorrect matches (such as frameborder=1 and <img
border=1) and that for the correct matches, it was questionable that the data
supported Steve’s claims
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24647#c13> However, further
analysis might show that Steve’s data could allow us to improve on what the
spec states about table@border and layout vs non-layout tables.

Data regading table@sortable: HTML5 has recenly introduced table@sortable,
which should count as indication (in an heuristic analysis) that the table is a
non-lalyout table. Evidence: This is a feature for data tables.

Regarding table@rules, table@frame: HTML4 had table@rules and table@frame, both
of which should coount as indication (in an heuristic analysis) that the table
is a non-layout-table. The attribute’s effects are such that they are unlikely
to be used in layout-tables. (With the possible exception of rules="none" and
frames="void" - but in that case *only* if there is no conforming border
attribute.) Evidence: These are features for data tables. They are somewhat
similar to table@border in that they affect borders.

Regarding td@axis (and th@axis ?): HTML4 had the td@axis, which was for use in
data tables. Evidence: This is a feature for data tables.

Regarding a number of other attributes: If <table>, <tr>, <tbody>, <td> etc
includes a @lang attribute, likelyhood is that it is a non-layout table. This
claim is based on deduction. Evidence: When @lang is added, one should think
that the use of tables is a conscious choice and not just a result taking
advantage of the layout grid effects of tables.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 15 February 2014 14:10:47 UTC