W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2014

Re: [whatwg] ARIA semantics of implied rows

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:01:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA5RUi4N9q8M0Y0EqcGGhfc_tu-7rDkdwJzs_pExgqVPQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Trebbien <dtrebbien@gmail.com>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Daniel Trebbien <dtrebbien@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Daniel Trebbien <dtrebbien@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > One issue is that the ARIA semantics for "implied rows" are not defined.
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand why ARIA would come into play at all when it
>> comes to tables. Weren't tables "accessible" (I realize it has always
>> been somewhat hard to convey them properly) long before ARIA existed?
>>
>
> The issue is that, as far as I can tell, HTML 4.01 does not support
> "implied rows":
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html
> This is new to HTML5.

No, HTML4 supported this; it probably didn't actually have any
normative text around it, but browsers certainly supported having a
rowspan go past the end of the explicit rows.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 26 September 2014 19:01:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:23 UTC