- From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:39:53 +0000
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > Interesting idea. I think the core tradeoff between <caption title=""> > and <table summary=""> is whether the additional information is > accessible (in some way) to sighted users. No its not. The difference is between some thing that facilitates comprehension for a user that /needs/ this information and something that is optional for a user who can already comprenend it. For example, a sighted user can quickly glance at a table and understand the relationships between various headers and row and column relationships. A non sighted user, has to interogate the table. @summary is useful as it does some of this work for the user because the user is informed in advance of what the table contains. It could be compared to a look ahead. >One reason we have both > title="" and alt="" on <img> is specifically to discourage UAs from > displaying alt to sighted users, since then it tends to contain > auxiliary information instead of replacement text. On the other hand, a > table summary should actually be auxiliary information about the table - > it doesn't need to fully replace the table because the table is still > there to be navigated if the user desires. Yes.
Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2009 11:40:42 UTC