- From: Craig Francis <craig@synergycms.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 22:38:41 +0100
- To: Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>
- Cc: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org
On 24 Jun 2007, at 20:14, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote: > rather than a null value for summary, layout tables should CLEARLY > be marked summary="Layout Table Containing X", so that the user > knows he or she can skip that table Sorry... I'm not a screen reader user, but I was under the impression that using a summary like that would pointlessly call into focus the use of a table. In the same way that adding an @alt to an <img>, with the content "This is a spacer image" - which I hope no-one does. I would have personally thought that a table with summary="", could be lineralised and ignored (like <div>'s) by the screen reader, on the basis that it is a table used for layout... Although, I think that in reality, a screen reader should also make the decision on whether it is a layout table on more than just the summary attribute... for example, if the table uses a <th>, then its quite likely to hold tabular data. But I think that Joshue has a point... in the same way that I like the validators complaining when I forget to add an @alt to an <img>... it would be great if they could do the same with the @summary... purely on the basis that the author could have forgotten to add the attribute... if they specify it as null, then its a declaration that they have thought about it, and they have decided that it was not required. Craig
Received on Sunday, 24 June 2007 21:39:12 UTC