- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 20:06:13 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18438 --- Comment #4 from Devarshi Pant <devarshipant@gmail.com> 2012-09-07 20:06:13 UTC --- > @Devarshi > The user agent (the screen reader) still supports the attribute, that is why it > will still work even with a HTML5 !DOCTYPE. It won't be valid HTML5 however, > but that may not be an issue for you if you want to support a particular kind > of user experience, so I say 'Go for it!' Will it help reinstating summary since it is easier to convince developers who are likely to use it but cannot because they want valid html5? I think the problem stems from its ill-advised use rather than due to the attribute itself. > >aria-describedby or similar alternatives, in my view, may not be as robust as > >the table summary. > They are excellent alternatives, and indeed the future. However, @summary is > 'hidden' by nature and aria-describedby will only point to an in page > description and not a description in another URI. Granted ARIA is the future, but when used to substitute the summary attribute, it helps blind / low vision users. -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 20:06:14 UTC