Re: Proposed change to checkpoint 5.3

Capitulation...

I think Ian is right here. Which is not such a surprise - just that I am a
purist. I would like to have a P3 that said don't do it, in teh section
which says 'use headers right. use lists right. use blockquotes right.'
etc.

Charles


Charles

On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Ian Jacobs wrote:

  Hello, 
  
  In the Proposed Recommendation, checkpoint 5.3
  (priority 2) reads "Avoid using tables for layout."
  
  During the teleconference today, we discussed this
  enigmatic checkpoint and its priority. The discussion
  began as I recounted how, when analyzing the accessibility
  of the W3C home page, I (and some other W3C Team members)
  felt as though the page was still accessible despite featuring
  a layout table. The W3C home page is designed so that it
  still makes sense when table markup is ignored (e.g., by Lynx).
  
  Checkpoint 5.3 as written today means that if you use 
  any table for layout, your page or site cannot conform 
  to the Double-A level. And yet, the W3C home page does 
  not seem like it poses significant barriers to accessibility.
  
  I would like to propose the following rewrite of the checkpoint:
  
  5.3: Design all layout tables so that the content
       is presented logically when the table is linearized. 
       Priority 1.
  
  This checkpoint then resembles checkpoint 6.1, which reads:
  
       6.1 Organize content logically using appropriate 
           structural markup so the organization remains clear
           even when associated style sheets are turned off 
           or are not supported. 
  
  Linearization will be discussed in the techniques.
  
  Some will argue that using a table for layout is a misuse
  of markup and I agree with them. We must emphasize style sheets
  as the right way to lay out pages. This proposal will not
  please purists, who have strong arguments for ensuring
  that tables be used only for tabular data. Jason White has
  successfully argued that BLOCKQUOTE not be used to
  indent text as this misuse confuses some tools. The same
  reasoning could be applied in this case, and that would be
  a strong argument for keeping the current checkpoint
  wording. 
  
  However, if there are ways to use tables that 
  "transform gracefully" (and that obey other checkpoints)
  AND if readily available technologies can linearize those tables 
  (as Lynx does), then please consider this proposal.
  
  Thank you,
  
   - Ian
  
  [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990324 
  -- 
  Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) 
  Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 
  http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
  

--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA

Received on Tuesday, 13 April 1999 23:35:00 UTC