Comment #509: CSS for tableless layouts

<comment>
The reviewer thinks that we "should make a VERY clear statement regarding 
the recommended use of CSS methods (DIVs and such) over tables when it 
comes to page layouts" and adds: "There are many discussions over this 
matter..."
</comment>

In the database, this has a link to GL 2.2 (time limits), but I don't see 
the connection.


<response>
Layout tables are not prohibited by WCAG 2.0, but the techniques document 
contains failures for abusing layout tables:
* F46: Failure of SC 1.3.1 due to using th elements, caption elements, or 
non-empty summary attributes in layout tables ;
* F49: Failure of SC 1.3.3 due to changing the meaning of content by 
positioning information with HTML layout tables.

There is also a CSS technique called "Positioning content based on 
structural markup" 
(www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/Overview.html#C6).
</response>

The above does not contain the "VERY clear statement" that the reviewer has 
requested. We could add to the description of the CSS technique C6 that 
this technique can be used instead of layout tables. We could also be more 
explicit by creating a technique called "Using CSS instead of layout 
tables", but maybe the technique level is too low. We've kept the intent 
section of "How to meet" technology-independent, except when citing 
examples. I'm not sure how to proceed with this one.

<older_issues>
Issue 487: "There is nothing in 1.3 to prevent the use of tables for 
layout. However, if relationships between cells exist, then those 
relationships must be exposed through structure. (...)
While the WG does not prohibit the use of tables for layout, it strongly 
encourages authors to use CSS instead."
</older_issues>
Regards,

Christophe


-- 
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on 
Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/ 


Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm

Received on Monday, 22 May 2006 14:11:53 UTC