- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:14:45 -0700
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Which part of this text gives the alternatives that will be voted on in the straw poll? On Jul 23, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > I've received permission to forward this to the Working Group for > wider discussion and suggestions before we proceed to a straw poll. > > I'd like to request that people focus on making concrete suggestions > for alternate wordings of the poll itself. I'd specifically like to > avoid open ended-suggestions on alternative ways to approach the > poll; I'd furthermore like to ask that people hold off on expressing > opinions as to which alternative they feel is better and why until > the actual poll itself. > > - Sam Ruby > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Draft of @summary text for HTML 5 poll > Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:14:26 +0100 > From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie> > Reply-To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie > To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> > CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com > >, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org > >, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org > > > > Hi all, > > There seems to be some confusion about exactly what we are voting on > in > the upcoming poll on @summary [Action 128] , just to be clear. > > PF will continue support for the tested and implemented summary > attribute as a prerequisite for improving accessibility of tables. We > support the goals to make tables accessible to all, and would like to > participate in that. However, we think this work should be done in > addition to, not instead of, providing support for the legacy summary > attribute. Therefore the current situation regarding the summary > attribute and this poll is not about engineering a new solution but > about the > status of the legacy summary attribute. > > Some of the possible questions in the survey could be worded around: > > * Summary is the best way to make tables accessible, even though it is > specific to people with disabilities > * Continued support for summary is needed as a bridging mechanism > while > other methods to make tables accessible are developed and proven > * Summary is not effective and should be immediately replaced with > other > mechanisms to make tables accessible > * A well constructed table with caption and headers would never need > any > kind of summarizing mechanism, user agent heuristics can generate a > good > overview > > The survey could also be broken into several questions, with several > straw poll options on each. Ian suggested there could also be scope > for > people to add their comments > and ideas. > > I am fine with whatever is the consensus after this text has been > submitted to the wider group. > I don't wish to design and build the poll but I hope that my initial > draft is enough to get this work moving. > > Cheers > > Josh > > @summary draft text for HTML poll. > > Overview > > HTML 5 needs a mechanism to provide a data table with a summary. An > explicitly associated, programmatic feature is required in order to > provide an overview of tabular data or a brief explanation of how to > navigate a data table for people who use Assistive Technology (AT). > > This is because an AT user needs to easily form a mental image of > a tables contents in order to better understand its structure, or > semantic relationships. The mechanism needs to be explicitly > associated > with the table or it becomes more difficult for AT to make that > association. A summary mechanism may seem irrelevant or redundant to > those with good eyesight because they have access to content > relationships at a glance > > Currently the @summary is considered conforming but obsolete, the > HTML 5 > specification wording is that "Authors should not specify the summary > attribute on table elements. The caption element or one of the other > techniques described in the table section should be used instead." [1] > > The specification does not explicitly mention what the @summary > attribute is for, or provide examples of how to use it correctly. > > To find out how to use @summary authors must refer to the HTML 4.01 > specification. [2] > > In the HTML 4.01 specification authors are advised that: > "“This attribute provides a summary of the table's purpose and > structure > for user agents > rendering to non-visual media such as speech and Braille." > > In short, @summary should be used as a mechanism to provide an > overview > of the structure of a data table. It can be used on both simple and > complex tables. On complex tables it can be used to give an overview > of > the structure, more simple tables may not need this description > however > @summary can then be used to describe the purpose of the table. > > This attribute was designed primarily to support the needs of blind > and > visually impaired users of AT. It is supported well by these user > agents > such as JAWS, Window Eyes, NVDA etc. Similar to the <caption> element, > if present on a data table the contents of the @summary are announced > out as soon as the user gives a table focus. The user can choose to > listen to this output or quickly move on to another element. > > @summary can therefore be used in conjunction with the <caption> > element > to provide much needed descriptions of the table, its contents and > purpose thereby increasing the accessibility of the web and improving > the user experience for people with disabilities. > > Protocols and Formats Working Group Input > > Note the following consensus was reached by the Protocols and Formats > Working Group (PFWG) during its teleconference of Wednesday, 3 June > 2009: [3] > > The PFWG also formally requested that the table summary element be > restored in HTML 5 on August 6th 2008 and again in June 2009: [4] [5] > > For more details on the @summary issue see the ESW wiki. [6] > > Limitations of @summary > > PFWG acknowledge that @summary has its limitations and that it is not > suitable as a long descriptor and therefore there needs to be another > mechanism such as ARIA describedby or some other suitable HTML 5 > mechanism that can act as a semantically rich container. > > This issue is similar to that discussed in "“Recommendations regarding > Long Text Alternatives" WAI-CG Task Force on Alternative Text. [7] > > However: PFWG notes that: > > *Summary currently serves a need, and serves it well. It is familiar > to > users of AT. It is supported in many browsers. > > *If it didn't exist, we'd need to invent it. Indeed, such alternative > approaches as have been proposed constitute a "reinvention" of > @summary. > > *We reject the argument that summary should be removed from the HTML > specification because it is not implemented on most web sites. We note > that accessibility is poorly supported on most web sites. The wider > web > is not an example of good practice. > > *We need summary for backward compatibility. > > *We note that summary is often used as a technique for accessibility > support where governmental regulations require governmental web > sites to > be accessible. An example is the U.S. Government's Social Security > Administration (SSA) pages as SSA conforms to its "Section 508." > mandate: [8] [9] > > > * If summary is removed, U.S. Government web sites, might find it more > difficult to conform to HTML 5. We further note that Section 508 > regulations apply to U.S. state and local governments, and that > similar > accessibility requirements are emerging in Canada, the U.K., the E.U., > Australia, and elsewhere. > > *Restoring summary in HTML 5 would not, in our understanding, > negatively > impact HTML 5 in any way. > > Use of @summary is also advised in the current Web Content > Accessibility > Guidelines (WCAG 2.0) and its corresponding tests (H73 & Test 111). > > WCAG 2: H73: Using the summary attribute of the table element to > give an > overview of data tables. [10] [11] > > References > > [1] > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#conforming-but-obsolete-features > > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html#adef-summary > > [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/03-pf-minutes.html > > [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Aug/0213.html > > [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jun/0026.html > > [6] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SummaryForTABLE > > [7] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5 > > [8] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/508/web.php > > [9] http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/1194.22.htm#(g) > > [10] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H73.html > > [11] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test111.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 23 July 2009 19:15:28 UTC