- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:12:49 -0600
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Shelley, > > It is good to see the summary attribute restored in your change > proposal to clean up tables [1] for HTML ISSUE 92 [2]. Thank you. > > Something that is missing in this proposal is the table headers > attribute [3] that had been restored in Issue 20. [4] > > Please consider adding it. History of the @headers issue is detailed > in the Wiki. [5] [6] > > Thanks. > > Best Regards, > Laura Thanks, Laura. I'll incorporate this change. Shelley > > [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/cleanuptable > [2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/92 > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#attr-tdth-headers > [4] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/20 > [5] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/IssueTableHeaders > [6] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/index.php?title=Category:TableHeaders > > On 3/31/10, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: >> Summary >> >> Summary: Replace too-simple and somewhat odd example table and >> verbose text unrelated to the table element, with one example table, >> derived from real world data that best demonstrates the table element. >> Refocus the text specifically on the table element. >> >> Rationale >> >> In the bug[1] related to this issue, the HTML5 Editor's rationale for >> not make this change was: >> >> >> Rationale: Given how bad the current situation is regarding >> authors providing >> explanatory text for tables, I think we should given them as much >> information >> as possible, in as many places as possible. We do AT users a >> disservice if we >> pretend that their needs aren't important enough to include advice on >> how to >> best serve them in the spec. >> >> The current table element section provides one very small and >> inadequate table example, with a great deal of prose basically telling >> people what to put in text surrounding the table. None of this prose >> is related to the purpose and interoperable use of the table or its >> child elements, and seemingly added to the section only as a way of >> justifying removing the summary attribute. I hate to use cliches, but >> this seems like a true case of the tail wagging the dog. >> >> Throwing lots of irrelevant text at authors does not make the table >> element any clearer, or ensure they use the element in the proper way. >> What's needed is a good, succinct example, with a clear explanation of >> the element, and the table's only unique attribute, summary. >> >> What people incorporate into the text surrounding an HTML table _is >> not the business of the W3C HTML Working Group_. Such >> over-specification only adds to the noise, and if you throw enough >> noise at people, all they'll do is tune out the important bits. >> >> The space would be better used by providing a table listing that uses >> all of the table child elements, demonstrating how the elements work >> together, and then providing a screenshot of the table. By creating a >> listing, people can see how the table is put together; the figure >> demonstrates the visual rendering of the table. >> >> In addition, we shouldn't belabor what is already a well known >> restriction on tables: don't use them for layout. Say it once, say it >> succinctly, and then move on. Don't continue to 'pick' at the spec >> reader. >> >> Details >> >> Replace the existing table element description section with the >> following (replace the URL for the img element in the figure with one >> local to the W3C, image can be copied, add appropriate cross-reference >> links): >> >> The table element represents data with more than one dimension, >> organized into non-empty columns and rows. It is the primary component >> of the table model. >> >> Tables are used for data display, only, and should not be used for >> layout purposes. In particular, users of accessibility tools like >> screen readers are likely to find it difficult to navigate pages with >> tables used for layout. >> >> The only unique attribute for the table element is the summary >> attribute. This attribute is optional, and should only be used with >> complex tables, in order to provide a visual description of the >> structure of the table—making the table easier to navigate when >> rendered non-visually. The summary may also include a brief >> description of the purpose of the table, if such purpose is visually >> apparent when viewing the entire table, but may not be apparent >> traversing the table, cell by cell. An example of a complex table, >> contained within a web page and with CSS styling, is shown in Listing >> Table-1. Figure Table-1 is a visual rendering of the table. >> >> >> <!DOCTYPE html> >> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> >> <head> >> <title>Example Table</title> >> <style> >> table >> { >> border: 1px solid #ccc; >> border-collapse: collapse; >> margin: 0 20px; >> } >> >> td, th >> { >> border: 1px solid #ccc; >> padding: 10px; >> } >> >> .female >> { >> background-color: #ffc; >> } >> >> tfoot >> { >> font-size: smaller; >> } >> </style> >> </head> >> <body> >> <table summary="First row is column headers separated into year and >> degree programs >> (bachelor, master, graduate). Each degree program is >> further split into >> biology and technology fields on second line. Each >> topic field is separated into >> male and female graduates on third row. Years are >> listed in first column."> >> >> <caption> >> <p>Degrees in the biological and biomedical sciences compared >> with degrees >> in technology conferred by degree-granting institutions, by level >> of >> degree and sex of student: Selected years, 2002-2007. >> </p> >> >> </caption> >> >> <colgroup span="1"></colgroup> >> <colgroup> >> <col class="male" /> >> <col class="female" /> >> </colgroup> >> <colgroup> >> <col class="male" /> >> >> <col class="female" /> >> </colgroup> >> <colgroup> >> <col class="male" /> >> <col class="female" /> >> </colgroup> >> <colgroup> >> <col class="male" /> >> <col class="female" /> >> >> </colgroup> >> <colgroup> >> <col class="male" /> >> <col class="female" /> >> </colgroup> >> <colgroup> >> <col class="male" /> >> <col class="female" /> >> </colgroup> >> >> <thead> >> <tr> >> <th rowspan="3">Year</th><th colspan="4">Bachelor's Degrees</th> >> <th colspan="4">Master's Degrees</th> >> <th colspan="4">Doctor's Degrees</th> >> </tr> >> >> <tr> >> <th colspan="2">Biology</th><th colspan="2">Technology</th> >> <th colspan="2">Biology</th><th colspan="2">Technology</th> >> <th colspan="2">Biology</th><th colspan="2">Technology</th></tr> >> <tr> >> >> <th>Male</th><th>Female</th><th>Male</th><th>Female</th><th>Male</th><th>Female</th> >> >> >> <th>Male</th><th>Female</th><th>Male</th><th>Female</th><th>Male</th><th>Female</th> >> </tr> >> </thead> >> <tbody> >> <tr> >> >> <td>2002</td><td>22,918</td><td>37,186</td><td>41,950</td><td>15,483</td> >> >> >> <td>2,981</td><td>4,009</td><td>13,267</td><td>6,242</td> >> <td>2,804</td><td>2,289</td><td>648</td><td>168</td> >> </tr> >> <tr> >> >> <td>2003</td><td>23,248</td><td>38,261</td><td>44,585</td><td>14,903</td> >> >> >> <td>3,227</td><td>4,430</td><td>13,868</td><td>6,275</td> >> <td>2,804</td><td>2,438</td><td>709</td><td>200</td> >> </tr> >> <tr> >> >> <td>2004</td><td>24,617</td><td>39,994</td><td>42,125</td><td>11,986</td> >> >> >> <td>3,318</td><td>4,881</td><td>13,136</td><td>5,280</td> >> <td>2,845</td><td>2,733</td><td>905</td><td>214</td> >> </tr> >> <tr> >> >> <td>2005</td><td>26,651</td><td>42,527</td><td>37,705</td><td>9,775</td> >> >> >> <td>3,654</td><td>5,027</td><td>12,470</td><td>4,585</td> >> <td>2,933</td><td>2,842</td><td>1,109</td><td>307</td> >> </tr> >> <tr> >> >> <td>2006</td><td>29,951</td><td>45,200</td><td>34,342</td><td>7,828</td> >> >> >> <td>3,568</td><td>5,179</td><td>11,985</td><td>4,247</td> >> <td>3,221</td><td>3,133</td><td>1,267</td><td>328</td> >> </tr> >> </tbody> >> >> <tfoot> >> >> <tr> >> <td colspan="13">Data from Institution of Education Sciences >> National Center >> for Education Statistics, derived from two tables: >> <a >> href="http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_298.asp"> >> Table 298. Degrees in the biological and biomedical >> sciences conferred by degree-granting >> institutions, by level of degree and sex of students; >> selected years, 1951-52 through 2006-07 >> </a> and <a >> href="http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_302.asp"> >> Table 302. Degrees in compueter and information >> sciences conferred by degree-granting >> institutions, by level of degree and sex of student: >> 1970–71 through >> 2006–07</a></td> >> </tr> >> </tfoot> >> </table> >> </body> >> </html> >> >> >> >> (image can be found at http://burningbird.net/images/table.jpg) >> >> Screenshot of Example complex table contained in Listing Table-1 >> >> >> Other changes: >> >> For each of the table element children in the listing—tr, th, col, >> colgroup, caption, tbody, thead, tfoot—reference the existing example >> in Listing Table-1, and remove any other example table. One example >> should be sufficient to demonstrate all of the table model elements. >> >> Though this is more related to Issue 32, it's still relevant: remove >> the warning about the summary attribute, and remove the attribute from >> the "obsolete but conforming" section. We've beat this horse so much >> that it's practically glue. Time to open the gates and let it loose. >> Time to move on to other things. >> >> Impact >> >> Positive Effects >> >> Replaces an unbelievable table example, with one that is believable, >> using real data. In the spec, we should avoid contrived and made up >> examples, as much as possible, as they can undermine the credibility >> of the section, and distract from element(s) being demonstrated. >> >> The change also clarifies the section and puts the focus back on the >> table element, rather than anything but. The example also demonstrates >> how to use all of the table elements, as well as making a correct use >> of the summary attribute. Linking all of the table child elements back >> to the table element section and the listing allows people to see how >> these elements are used, especially in context. >> >> Negative Effects >> >> Will take some of the editor's time to make this change. The use of >> labels such as Listing Table-1 and Figure Table-1 may not fit it >> within the writing style of the rest of the specification (adjust as >> necessary). The listing is also a little large, though as a >> demonstration of a family of elements, not overly so. >> >> References >> >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8449 >> >> >> ------------- >> >> Shelley Powers >> http://realtech.burningbird.net >> >> > > > -- > Laura L. Carlson >
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 04:13:25 UTC