Re: Technique 5.5.2 - Check TABLE elements for valid CAPTION element

Charles's idea of a structured method sounds good.

The SUMMARY can't be evaluated in the absense of the CAPTION, and the page
designer's decisions about CAPTION and SUMMARY are related.  They have to
work together.  You can't address them correctly with evaluation and repair
methods that are entirely separate.

In other words, if a TABLE has neither CAPTION nor SUMMARY, the author
should first be asked to come up with a verbal description, and then they
should decide how much of this, on second thought, they want to show
everyone as a CAPTION and how much of it will be relegated to the
accompanying SUMMARY.

Al


At 03:12 AM 2000-08-31 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>Except that:
>
>1. ER can't change WCAG priorities
>2. Summary is often not rendered, and in many older browsers not even
>available
>3. Captions for Layout tables are like using other data structures for them -
>not relevant since it is not the point of the design.
>
>Better to check for whether a table is used for layout or data first, and
>then base the checking on that. (For example if it is a layout table it
>should NOT have TH elements, whereas if it is a data table it should.
>
>Charles McCN
>
>On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Chris Ridpath wrote:
>
>  I think we should remove this technique because we already have a
>  requirement (technique 5.5.1) that the user enter a table summary. This
>  technique is redundant.
>  
>  Table captions are rendered by the current Netscape and IE5 above the table
>  and this can be distracting, especially for layout tables. The table
summary
>  is not rendered by these browsers.
>  
>  If we do leave this technique in then it should be moved down to priority 3
>  from priority 2.
>  
>  Chris
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
>-- 
>Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
>Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
>Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia 
>

Received on Thursday, 31 August 2000 11:12:23 UTC