- From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:19:53 +0100
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Mike Smith <mike@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>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Ian Hickson wrote: >> Is the need not served by <caption>? > No. A caption is provided visually. [...] It is also worth noting that <caption> is a terse descriptor. @summary is a long descriptor. While <caption> will often suffice, as there are certainly some simple tables that may not need a more detailed description, the markup language should natively provide a long descriptor to provide an overview of more complex tables when needed. @summary /already/ does this and keeping it in the HTML 5 spec principles will support the vital need for backwards compatibility with existing Assistive Technology etc. > Evidence has been presented that actually not only does summary="" not > actually in practice serve the need for which it is intended well, but > that it causes extra harm to users [...] In my 5 years as an accessibility consultant for a national service provider for blind and visually impaired people I have never encountered anything like this, so that is a bold claim. > with certain sites including > information in the summary="" attribute that should be available to all > readers universally but that is, due to the use of the summary="" > attribute, in fact not available universally. Concerns about universality are valid but in this instance slightly misguided as to me the @summary attribute genuinely supports /some/ users needs very well - which is preferential to supporting everyones poorly. Even it it fails to meet the criterion of a 'Universally Designed' attribute that is not, in this case, a good enough reason to remove it. Cheers Josh
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2009 10:20:50 UTC