- From: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:40:14 +1000
- To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie
- Cc: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, public-html@w3.org
On 6/19/07, Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie> wrote: > > Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote: > >The meta-data contained in the > > summary element should be reused by user agents or assisstive > > technologies to provide a visual slash renderable version of the > > meta-data provided by the summary attribute. > > If this meta-date could also be made searchable by the likes of Google > bots etc, it could be really useful. If I am again mixing science > fiction with science fact, and it already is, apologies in advance. > That sounds good to me (although I'd still like to know why the XHTML2 group propose changing summary from attribute to element [1]). The idea that the table summary should be accessible in visual media is good. It may seem obvious that any UA *could* access this attribute, but the HTML4.01 spec (and XHTML2) are quite clear that the intent behind table summaries is "rendering to non-visual media such as speech and Braille" [1][2]. So it was not intended to be used in visual media? Maybe I am reading the spec too literally. Many tables benefit from some extra explanation (i.e. a summary) about their structure. This can be useful to everyone, if it is not limited to "non-visual media". I believe this is what the WCAG Samurai refer to in their advice. But if use something outside the <table>, something other than table@summary, then that information isn't explicitly associated with the table (and it becomes more difficult for AT to make that association). But is it better to duplicate that information outside the <table> for visual media (WCAG discourage duplication with "summary should not duplicate the caption" [3]) or to provide nothing in the visual media? The idea that tables presented visually never require an additional summary is a bit narrow I think... not really taking into account the opportunities for improving information comprehension that the summary could offer. I think we should retain summary BUT remove the note about non-visual media in favour of adopting universal access. We should be encouraging its inclusion in visual rendering (I think it should support the same kind of styling, especially positioning, that <caption> does [4]). Unless there are reasons for keeping @summary limited to non-visual media? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-tables.html#edef_tables_summary [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html#adef-summary [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20070517/Overview.html#H73 [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/tables.html#propdef-caption-side
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 05:40:21 UTC