- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 00:36:43 +0000
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Doug Jones <doug_b_jones@me.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML WG Public List <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > SEONDLY: Those problems that HTML4 describes are much less relevant > today. It is enough to look at the dichotomy that HTML4 describes - and > which you echo: 'authors should use style sheets to control layout > rather than tables'. As things have developed, this has become largly > false dichotomy - exactly via CSS, authors can control tables. In fact > is possible to read what HTML4 says as saying «rather than trusting > tables, authors should trust css». Those problems which HTML4 describes > are such that I have trouble understanding what the description is > about - but it is more about function than about philosophy. I cannot follow your argument here. > THIRDLY: No risks, you say. But perhaps there is a risk that authors, > who could have increased their pages' accessibility by adding aria to > their table based pages, just let their pages be as they are, because, > after all, their pages causes no error in theor current state, while > they would get validation errors if they added aria to their tables. False. Doug's proposal is a null change proposal and table role="presentation" will not cause a validation error according to the current HTML draft. See: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/content-models.html#annotations-for-assistive-technology-products-aria "Authors must not set the ARIA role and aria-* attributes in a manner that conflicts with the semantics described in the following table, except that the presentation role may always be used." (Conceivably, a hyper-intelligent checker might penalize authors for abusing tables but it would penalize them regardless of the presence of role="presentation", not because of it.) > As for the third, point, then I don't agree with myself. I tend to > agree with Ian in that an honest @role is a 'godsend', which allows > authors to check whether they have used an element for a valid purpose. What you mean like using an element with some sort of defined semantic meaning, like a table for a table? Oh wait... ;) -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Saturday, 15 January 2011 00:37:15 UTC