- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:52:35 +0100
- To: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- CC: public-html@w3.org, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
Philip TAYLOR 2009-03-01 11.33: > [All individuals removed from CC list] > > Composite reply, having watched the debate silently so far : > > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > >> This is also related to how sighted persons perceive a table. We >> perceive it as a collections of cells, in different relationships. To >> us there is one "cell" - or place - that relates to all the cells, and >> that is the caption. To add a summary for the table container becomes >> a little bit ... abstract. > > But we are not discussing where the summary should appear visually; As if I do? Where is that shaddow you're fighting? > we are discussing where it should appear in the markup. right. > And in the > markup, <TABLE> is the 'one "cell" - or place - that relates to all > the cells', so it is surely as an attribute of <TABLE> that "summary" > should appear. Here is a comparison: The name of <table> is from now on <html>. The name of <tbody> is from now on <body>. The name of <caption> - now called <head>. So, no, I don't see why <caption> is a "totally unrelated concept". For some reason, there is no problem accepting that meta-information and "What this page is about" information goes into the <head> element. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 14:53:24 UTC