- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:40:00 -0700
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > I find nothing objectionable in this Change Proposal, and agree that > the example table used in the spec is somewhat contrived and > unrealistic. The example table given in this Change Proposal seems > more realistic, exhibiting useful complexity without being > overwhelming. On second review, I have to retract my statement that there is "nothing objectionable". The table itself is generally acceptable as an example of a table. However, I had skipped over the part where the @summary attribute is reintroduced, and given an explanatory paragraph. That is not relevant to the Issue at hand, and given the current state of the @summary attribute, should be removed. If @summary is later reintroduced as a valid attribute in HTML, the example may be amended. As well, as a technical detail, a footer for the table should not go in a cell of the table. That is an abuse of table semantics. It should appear in text surrounding the table. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2010 00:40:52 UTC