Re: ISSUE-92 Change Proposal

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <> 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.


Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2010 00:40:52 UTC