- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 07:21:23 -0500
- To: Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>, Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
Hi all, What about using a <summary> as a generalized element with <details> etc. Leif mentioned this previously. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jun/0045.html On Fri, 05 Jun 2009 Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > In our internal debates at the HTML4all.org initiative, ideas > about a generalized <summary> element was put forward. By > generalized, it was meant that it could play the summarizing role > both for <table>, <figure> and (perhaps) for <canvas>. > > The very idea about a <summary> element *only* for <table> has > already been presented for Ian, but the idea was put aside due to > serious DOM compatibility problems with current Web browsers. As a > response, I proposed to have the <summary> element /inside/ > caption, however Ian responded that it was not clear to him that > it was necessary to distinguish the summary from the caption in > that way. Also, my HTML4all colleges did not support making the > summary feature dependent on presence of <caption> in any way. > > However, <summary> as child of <figure> (and <canvas>) should not > have the same serious DOM issues that <summary> as child of > <figure> has. <figure> even allows to move the table caption to > the caption of the <figure> element: > > "When a table element is in a figure element alone but for the > figure's legend, the caption element should be omitted in favour > of the legend."[1] (In Ian's proposal, one would then move the > summary content into the legend, together with caption content.) > > And as long as a table doesn't have a <caption> element, then the > DOM problems of the <summary> element almost disappears. Hence, in > those cases when one move the content of <caption> to the > <figure>'s <legend> element, the use of <summary> as child of > <table> would not face the same level of DOM problems. > > Thus, if the working group decides that, in line with the WCAG 2.0 > requirement, the summary feature needs to be a > "programmatically-determined mechanism"[2][3], the <figure> gives > us two options w.r.t. a <summary> element: <summary> could be a > child of <table> or a child of <figure>. > > In a summary: If we are not looking narrowly at the <table> > summary problem, but expand the problem to <figure> and <canvas>, > then it should be easier to introduce the <summary> element. > > [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tabular-data.html#the-caption-element > [2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SummaryForTABLE > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-programmatically-determined-head Best Regards, Laura -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 12:33:18 UTC