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

Re: PF Response: @Summary

From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:50:43 -0400
Message-ID: <fb6fbf560907051950k40f6f3e1ya9774766401c6e89@mail.gmail.com>
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "wai-liaison@w3.org" <wai-liaison@w3.org>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, HTML WG Public List <public-html@w3.org>
A month ago, Laura Carlson clarified the need for @summary:

Thu, 4 Jun 2009 06:57:42 -0500

> In the absence of a summary, the non-visual user must investigate the
> table carefully and fully, merely in order to ascertain whether or not
> it is the correct table, what information the table contains, if the
> information in the table is germane, how many rows by how many columns
> to expect, the flow of the table, etc.

[And later discussion suggested that may it really ought to have been
named @datastructure instead of @summary]

What information should the summary contain that should *not* be in
the headers or the caption?

Would the @summary purpose be better fulfilled by just ensuring that
it was easy to read the headers as a sort a preview?

[I realize that not all tables are properly marked up with <th> -- but
I'm assuming (incorrectly?) that authors who can't get that right are
unlikely to get an invisible attribute right anyhow.]

[My apologies to those whose Cc status I wasn't sure about.]

Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 02:51:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:47 UTC