W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: [DRAFT] Heartbeat poll

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 08:47:27 +0200
Message-ID: <4A75367F.3070409@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> ...
>> Your sampling is flawed because it doesn't account for a significant 
>> number of web pages that are not accessible to the public.
> Pages that are not part of the Web do not need to use a standard 
> interoperable across the entire Web, they can use proprietary formats.
 > ...

Sorry? I think this is something we need to discuss. Just because a 
web-based application only runs on an intranet doesn't mean it's 
irrelevant. It just means it is harder to collect data about it.

 > ...
> We are eliminating all the aspects of tables that make it suitable for 
> layout (all the presentational attributes) in an even stronger fashion 
> than sumamry="". While <table summary> is conforming but discouraged, 
> <table width>, <tr bgcolor>, etc, are all completely obsolete and not in 
> any sense conforming now.
> If you have an alterantive solution for tabular data that is less likely 
> to be used for layout tables, though, I'm certainly open to suggestions. 
> With summary="" we can improve matters. So we should.
> ...

I think it has been pointed out many times that HTML5 currently does not 
contain any improvement, in that none of the alternatives being proposed 
actually addresses the original use case.

> ...
>> I don't believe that JAWS or other assistive technology applications 
>> will immediately make changes to their tools based on a Working Draft 
>> that is under a great deal of contention.
> HTML5 doesn't require any change. It keeps summary="" in the 
> implementation requirements unchanged. (In fact I would go further -- it 
> introduces implementation requirements that HTML4 did not have.)
> ...

HTML5 requires changes for those who want (or have to) to create 
conforming content (where I understand "conforming" as passing a 
validator without warning).

> ...
> If you want to make summary="" conforming and not obsolete, then we will 
> need reasoned arguments and research to demonstrate why this is expected 
> to improve accessibility. For example, as a start, the PFWG could respond 
> to the questions in this e-mail:
> ...

Actually, I think the burden is on those who want a change compared to 
what HTML4 said.

> ...

BR, Julian
Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 06:48:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:52 UTC