[Bug 24647] Define table@border as explicit indication that the *borders* are meaningful

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24647

--- Comment #25 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> ---
(In reply to Leif Halvard Silli from comment #24)
> (In reply to steve faulkner from comment #23)

> Btw, tt is fine that you emphasise *border*. However you said that your data
> analysis related not to border but to ”data table”.
> 
> ]]
> can you provide data that there is a strong correlation between the presence
> of <table border=1> and the table being used as a data table?

Steve,

it seems I need to stress that this bug does not seek to justify table@border.

(I choose to trust that the accident caused by Hixie, and which caused @border
to be removed from the list of ”content attributes” for <table>, will not be
used as pretext for anything:
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24591#c10>. There is a decision
to have border in the spec as conforming etc. If border is removed from the
spec, then it will happen in a way that respects the rules of our working
group.)

So what does this bug seek to do?

This bug merely seeks to change the semantic meaning of table@border, *from*
the definition that is currently recorded in the spec (and which says that
there *is* a correlation between table@border and ‘data table’/’non-layout
table’) *to* a definition of @border that focuses on the borders themselves as
significant.

So regardless of whether your interpretation (that table@border is not
particularly linked to data tables) is correct or not, it seems to me that your
interpretation is compatible, rather than incompatible, with what this bug
proposes.

How come?

Take for instance, once again, the table with border=1 at
<http://ntvtelugu.com/>. I have looked at that page in W3M.

Let’s say that this is a layout table, at least in some ATs (for example
VoiceOver does see all tables of that page as layout tables, it seems). Still,
my claim is that borders are significant: The first cell of the table contains
an <img>, without @alt, where the @src says src="titles/recentvideos.png". And
W3m thus renders the text ”recentvideos” inside the first cell. The cell is
clearly distinguishable thanks to the border - visually, it looks like a
paragraph. But if I remove the border, the text ”recentvideos” no longer looks
as a paragraph. Instead, it looks like the first line in cell number two (on
the next row.) So, in a browser like W3m, the borders are still significant and
quite helpful despite that the table may be seen as a layout table.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 15 February 2014 18:30:05 UTC