[Bug 24647] Define table@border as explicit indication that the *borders* are meaningful in some media and/or UAs

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

--- Comment #27 from Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> ---
(In reply to Leif Halvard Silli from comment #15)
> Or take http://myownfreehost.net/, where there is a single table, which
> happes to ahve <table border=1>. This table is near the bottom of the page
> and it has 6 cells with one piece of advertisement in each cell. I would not
> call this a ”layout table”. ALthough, it is perhaps debatable.

It totally, unquestionably is a layout table. I don't even understand how one
could come to any other conclusion, or believe that it is debatable. But then
again, as you are so fond of saying, the editor doesn't really understand that
much.

This table is not used with anything remotely resembling the semantics of a
table. It is just there because the author didn't know how (or care) to lay out
those items horizontally in any other way.

> THe table has much in common, I wold say, with navigation bars.

Yes, it does. Which is why it is presentational.

> And, btw, is a navigation
> bar in the form of a single row table with one link per cell a ”layout
> table”? 

What else could it possibly be? Have you ever designed with tables?

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

Received on Friday, 28 February 2014 16:39:14 UTC