Joshue O Connor wrote: > 4) Finally it should be appraised just for what it is - a mechanism for > describing the relationships between data cells in complex tables that > is useful for blind and VIP and we need to explicitly keep it as such. One issue here, from my point of view, is that the attribute name is a serious mismatch for that function.... which leads to major author confusion as to what should go in this attribute. I know if I were authoring a web page and had to put in an @summary for some reason (e.g. mandate from on high), I'd have no idea what to do with it. The name would mislead me, and even if I went and read the spec I'd still have no idea what to put in it. Would it make sense to add a datastructure attribute (or some other more suitable name), require UAs to look for the relationships between data cells in that attribute and then in @summary in that order, and make use of @summary a validator warning or some such? And make sure that the spec has some examples of tables and corresponding @datastructure values. -BorisReceived on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 15:04:56 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:49 UTC