- From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:19:32 +0000
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Cc: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
2009/3/1 Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>: >> 1: The summary attribute isn't a property of the caption element, but a >> property of the table itself (its purpose is to describe how to read the >> table, not how to read the caption). > > Could it become a real problem that authors would think that > caption@summary is describing how to read the <caption>? Yes, it would be a problem. The summary attribute is a property of the table, and in no way related to the caption element. All it would do is add confusion to something that already seems confused. I don't see the point in making it more confusing. > It is exactly because authors needs to understand the difference between > titling and summarizing that they need to be close. Relating unrelated concepts does not aid understanding. >> 2: There isn't a strong relationship between the caption element and the >> summary attribute; the caption element isn't required, but that doesn't >> mean a summary shouldn't be provided. > > Both <caption> and @summary are optional. So why not keep the optional meta > info in the same element? Because making the summary attribute dependent on the caption element reduces opportunities where the summary attribute can be used - if a caption isn't provided, it's impossible to provide a summary with this proposal (unless you provide an empty caption element, but the caption element shouldn't be empty if it's provided). As the summary attribute is no way dependent on a caption, serves a completely different purpose, and is a valuable accessibility attribute, it doesn't make sense to reduce the opportunities to provide a summary attribute. > In my proposal, caption will be needed to provide a summary, (as long as you > want to write undeprecated code). <caption> itself can be empty though. As > long as <caption> is emtpy, it will not caption any attention in visual user > agents. An empty caption element is an ugly hack just to make the summary attribute dependent on the caption element. > The only drawback I see here is that it will require more to add the > @summary since one needs to add the emtpy caption element first. The fact the summary attribute is in no way related to the caption element is also a drawback. -- _____________________________ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 10:20:16 UTC