- From: Robert Neff <robneff@home.com>
- Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 10:28:07 -0500
- To: <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, <W3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
i concur with phil. i had used the title early on and it wrecked havoc on pwWebSPeak and other tools as I would get the alt and title spoken so it provided redundant words. I also would be concerned that this would convolute implementation. i have not used title since and have avoided it. unless i am missing the point, i do not see any value added. what does title bring to the table? rob ----- Original Message ----- From: <pjenkins@us.ibm.com> To: <W3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2000 10:44 AM Subject: Re: proposed clarification of TABLE caption, title, and summary for the techniques document > > > > >Provide a few word description of the table with the "title" attribute. > > PJ: I don't agree with also adding a "title" attribute, it is too redundant > and there are no examples of why it would be needed. We are asking the > author, tools, and browser to do too much and loose them in the process. > Even if a browser rendered the "title" attribute, what would it add as far > as accessibility in addition to the surrounding text, caption, summary, and > table itself? "Title" attribute was not in the original techniques [1], why > add it now? > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS-19990505/#tables > > > Regards, > Phill Jenkins > >
Received on Saturday, 29 January 2000 10:38:09 UTC