- From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:19:26 +0200
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- CC: Bill Mason <w3c@accessibleinter.net>, public-html@w3.org
Robert Burns wrote: > I've been closely following all of the threads, but I haven't seen > anyone arguing that there is an alternative to @summary other than > just not providing such assitive technology support. Maybe I should have been more explicit but I have suggested that providing default-visible information to summarise the table. As a strawman proposal, something like: <p id="descWidgetSales">The table shows the sales of widgets for the financial year 2005-2006. <span style="display:none">The columns indicate sales in different regions and the rows indicate the months of the year. The last row and last column show a total for the month or region.</span></p> <table description="descWidgetSales">[...]</table> This has several disadvantages; it is rather verbose (the need for an explicit id), it uses the (currently) obsolete style attribute (purely as a demonstration convenience), and relies on nonvisual UAs rendering display:none content (but in principle one could use media queries to address this issue). However I believe it would be used more often, and kept up to date better, than @summary. Can these problems be fixed? I think it is worth examining rather than just repeating the mantra that @summary fulfills use cases and so must be retained. In my mind it is much more interesting to investigate if one can come up with a *better* solution rather than just defending the status quo on the basis that any solution, however little used, is good enough. Of course I also believe that the draft should specify how @summary is to be handled by UAs.
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 18:54:52 UTC