W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

RE: Taking another round at @summary

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 01:55:48 +0100
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Cc: 'Jonas Sicking' <jonas@sicking.cc>, 'Denis Boudreau' <dboudreau@webconforme.com>, 'HTML Accessibility Task Force' <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, 'HTML WG Public List' <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100107015548523495.e69e0322@xn--mlform-iua.no>
John Foliot, Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:50:00 -0800 (PST):
> Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> It is a general problem with the current
>> draft that the only thing that is specifically dedicated to explain the
>> table structure, is an obsoleted attribute - @summary.
> Point of clarification Leif, @summary was removed from the list of
> obsolete attributes (http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#obsolete),
> although the draft still treats it as a second-class citizen by suggesting
> that it needs to generate a warning whenever used, even if/when it might
> be used appropriately and correctly.

OK, so I was wrong in perceiving it as if Jonas was suggesting to 
obsolete it again, in favour of ARIA, I suppose. Thanks for keeping the 
debate on track! 

The real issue then is whether the advice (the warning in the 
validator) to use another feature rather than @summary increases 
accessibility.  In the evaluation of that question, we are then faced 
with the fact that WCAG 2.0 requires that table summaries can be 
programmatically determined, and that @summary so far still is the only 
HTML 5 feature which can be programmatically determined as a table 
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 7 January 2010 00:56:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:06 UTC