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

Re: How to make complex data tables more accessible to screen-reader users

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 09:20:04 -0500
Message-ID: <643cc0270907060720ufb91c20lcf0df5014ad09706@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, public-html@w3.org
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Julian Reschke<julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> But I'm quite willing that put my opinions aside. If the consensus of
>>> the working group is to have a vote on either a set of short essays or
>>> on a comprehensive wiki page, then I'm willing to both facilitate the
>>> vote and to attempt to evaluate consensus on the results.
>> My personal opinion on this issue is that I would rather not have a purely
>> technical issue be resolved through a working group vote. If we were to
>> proceed with this vote to decide whether or not to include the summary
>> attribute, it would be the first time such a vote has been used to resolve a
>> purely technical issue in this working group, and, IMHO, would set an
>> unfortunate precedent, subverting the process that has been used for all
>> prior decisions based on logical and technical reasoning.
>> While I'm confident in the ability of this group as a whole to
>> collectively reach the right conclusion, if, as a result of the vote, the
>> summary attribute was included, it would be a clear symptom of a design by
>> committee process  a process I think we should try to avoid  simply to
>> appease some particularly vocal group members, despite the almost total lack
>> of any empirical evidence in support of their position.

>> I think the best way to proceed with this issue is for the chairs to
>> accept that all evidence submitted so far has been fairly analysed, and that
>> based on the available evidence, the correct decision has been made. Then
>> the issue should be closed, and remain closed until such time as additional
>> evidence, preferably in the form of scientifc studies, is presented that
>> overturns the result of all previous observational data seen, and
>> contradicts the current outcome.
> For the record: I strongly disagree with this opinion. There are good
> technical reasons from both sides, and there doesn't seem to be another way
> to end the discussion.
> And yes, this would be the first vote of this kind, but I don't expect it'll
> be the last.
> Best regards, Julian

I agree with Julian.

There is no empirical data to support either side in this issue.

Reviewing randomly accessed web pages is not a proper study, and
conclusions reached based on this review are subjective.

In addition, there is a looming deadline related to last call, so
there is no time to do proper studies. Frankly, neither side likely
has the resources necessary to do proper studies.

Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 14:20:44 UTC

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