- From: Jean-Marie D'Amour <jmdamour@videotron.ca>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 11:48:20 -0400
- To: Chuck Letourneau <cpl@starlingweb.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Hello Chuck, I agree with your Note. For now, the best tool to test complex tables in the real world is Home Page Reader, except for axis. Personnaly, I ceased to use Lynx for testing since Opera 6. I can made all tests with Opera or HPR. I have no objection to maintain Lynx in the document but i don't see how we can recommand a different usage for the comprehensive evaluation. Regards, Jean-Marie D'Amour A 11:08 2002-05-30, Chuck Letourneau a écrit : >This change log entry is clipped from >[http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/impl/changelog.html] >and refers to the use of LYNX > >- start of clipping - > >* explain more about what to look for in code when reviewing data >tables in lynx [20011030] >[from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-eo-editors/2001Oct/0009.html] > [20020426] add a Note in #2, "don't use lynx on data tables." > (provide a link to somewhere where it's defined) > >- end of clipping - > >I think that simply stating, "don't use lynx on data tables" is not the >solution to this change request. > >The "problem" with using Lynx to evaluate the accessibility of data tables >arises because it does not (in the release I use) expose accessible markup >that an author may have added (i.e. headers, id, scope, etc.) that >(theoretically) make the table accessible to web agents that support such >code. > >On the other hand, LYNX can still be used to show whether an author has >designed a table to make sense when linearized. > >Therefore I propose that something like the following note be added to >both the preliminary and comprehensive sections (links to checkpoints >could be added): > >- start of note - > >NOTE: LYNX cannot be used to verify compliance with WCAG Priority 1 >checkpoints 5.1 and 5.2 . To do so, use a Web agent or assistive tool >that can interpret advanced table markup. If such a tool is not >available, manually inspect the source code to determine if advanced table >markup has been used. Then, when a suitable tool becomes available, >revisit the tables to ensure that the markup is reporting properly. LYNX >can, however, be used to verify compliance with WCAG Priority 2 checkpoint >5.3. > >- end of note - > >Comment 1: I am not certain that any tools fully (or consistently) >support all advanced table mark up yet. Thus it is doubtful whether even >visual inspection of code is entirely useful since we are essentially >guessing how the markup might be interpreted by some future tool. This is >an enduring problem for people trying to achieve Double-A. > >Comment 2: All this begs another question: should we distinguish between >how we recommend the use of LYNX in a preliminary review and in a >comprehensive review? > >Discussion would be appreciated. > >Cheers, >Chuck Letourneau > >Starling Access Services >"Access A World Of Possibility" Jean-Marie D'Amour M.Éd. Formateur CAMO pour personnes handicapées www.camo.qc.ca
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 11:49:02 UTC