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

Re: Summary of Thursday's IRC conversation about @summary

From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:42:41 +0200
Message-ID: <4A2FC661.1090708@malform.no>
To: jgraham@opera.com
CC: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
jgraham@opera.com On 09-06-10 10.38:
> Quoting Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>:
>> What do you think of the summary element, as long term solution, that
>> Laura has pointed out to several folks? Other than she didn't use
>> bullets?
> As a child of <table> <summary> (or any other element) has too bad 
> legacy compatibility properties to work.

I suppose there was meant to be a comma between "<table>" and 
"<summary>".  I discussed the issues here:


Semantics is what must be agreed upon first, though.
leif halvard
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 14:43:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:49 UTC