Re: summary attribute compromise proposal

Murray Maloney On 09-08-06 16.23:

> At 02:38 PM 8/6/2009 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> In that regard: the draft says that UAs MAY present @summary.
>> I wonder if this is *predictable* enough? SHOULD seems
>> righter.
>> The reason for not saying MUST are:
>> * to avoid duplication: if one of the new recommended methods
>> have been used, and the UA is able to identify and support
>> those. * that some tables in fact are layout tables.
> Repeated from a previous response to Maciej:
> I have noted comments from various people including yourself
> about the visibility of @summary. I would like to suggest
> wording...
> "The summary attribute is intended primarily for use by
> Assistive Technology (AT).

Would it not be fruitful to talk about media queries and media 
challenges instead of AT? So e.g. say that

"The summary attribute is by default only intended for speech and 
screenreader media".

> The value of the attribute is
> intended to be text which describes or summarizes the table for
> readers who may not be able to see it. Interactive screen
> readers and other AT software can present the value of the
> summary attribute to the user to assist them in understanding 
> its structure or content. Visual user agents may also display
> the value of the summary attribute, but are advised to do so
> only at user request or as a result of user preference
> settings, because the information contained in the summary
> attribute is typically redundant for individuals who can see
> the table."


> I didn't spend a lot of time writing that, so it could

> certainly benefit from wordsmithing.

leif halvard silli

Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 13:39:21 UTC