- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:48:25 +0300
- To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie
- Cc: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, 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>
On Jul 6, 2009, at 20:50, Joshue O Connor wrote: > Ok, if you look at the following complex table at Gez Lemons site, > Juicy > Studio. [1] > > For a suitable @summary overview you could say something like: > > <table summary="A complex table of two halves. Firstly, there are 7 > columns with the headings Child Investment, Type, Status, Allocation, > Total Cost of Ownership, Return on Investment, Net Present Value, with > their corresponding values in rows beneath them. The table is then > followed by a column called Property that has two sections of > sub-headings of Budgeted, Actual and Forecasted with their > corresponding > running cost values for three weekly periods starting from the 12th of > December 2005 to the 26th">. > [1} http://juicystudio.com/wcag/tables/complexdatatable.html I observe that the actual summary looks like this: > <table summary="Child investment portfolios with budgeted, actual > and forecast running costs for particular dates"> It's much shorter, and it's caption-like. I think this anecdotal case study supports the notion that @summary isn't actually used as prescribed--not even by experts. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 10:49:21 UTC