- From: Marcelo de Arruda <marruda@technomosaic.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 10:53:00 +0000
- To: thatch@us.ibm.com
- CC: gv@trace.wisc.edu, "'Greg Lowney'" <greglo@microsoft.com>, "'Wendy A Chisholm'" <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, kasday@acm.org
Hello, A suggestion as to how one might deal with linearization of tables is by setting its attribute inside of the "table" tag. For instance, I could use the attribute "title=layout1" to define the table as serving layout purposes, and "title=data1" defining tabular data content. Marcelo de Arruda -- Technical Team Coordinator TechnoMOSAIC, LLC marruda@technomosaic.com phone: 765-525-4568 fax: 765-525-6165 thatch@us.ibm.com wrote: > How do you distinguish tables used for layout and those for tabular data? I > think the distinction is when the row-column position has meaning. > > TV listings, for example, are "tabular data." The layout of tabular data > lets the sighted user observe the row-column semantics. Layout and tabular > data get kind of mashed together. I think (hope) no one is arguing that > tabular data needs to linearize well. Instead, use appropriate table > markup, TH elements and headers attributes, summary attribute and caption > element. > > The example of a form whose input elements are placed in a table with > labels in the cells above is tabular data because row-column position > carries meaning. Clearly tabular data is not restricted to numbers. TV > Listings have very few numbers. The Form example is no less a table than > the TV listings. The Form example is properly marked up if appropriate > table markup is used. Of course the form can also be marked up with the > LABEL element. > > My bottom line is that when row-column position carries meaning, then > linearization is not relevant. > > Jim Thatcher > IBM Accessibility Center > (512)838-0432 > After 3/31/2000 jim@jimthatcher.com (512)306-0931 > > "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu> on 03/13/2000 08:46:25 PM > > Please respond to gv@trace.wisc.edu > > To: "'Greg Lowney'" <greglo@microsoft.com>, "'Wendy A Chisholm'" > <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > cc: kasday@acm.org > Subject: RE: linearized tables > > Hi Greg, > > I think the problem is that most programs linearize by listing the items in > the order they are appear in the HTML. So labels above items would not > linearize in any very usable fashion. > > This is not a problem with tables that present tabular information. In > that > case - the column headers across the top (If appropriately marked) would be > the proper way to lay out a table. (especially since there are usually > labels down the side too.) Not that the linearization rule does not apply > to tables used for tabular information. > > It WOULD be a good idea for programs that linearize tables to give the user > the option to flip it top-for-side to see if it were easier to understand > or > use in that manner. I don't know which ones do that though. Anyone know > of table linearizers with a flip layout function? > > Gregg > > -- ------------------------------ > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. > Professor - Human Factors > Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis. > Director - Trace R & D Center > Gv@trace.wisc.edu, http://trace.wisc.edu/ > FAX 608/262-8848 > For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu > > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Greg Lowney > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2000 11:46 AM > To: Wendy A Chisholm; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > Cc: kasday@acm.org > Subject: RE: linearized tables > > Hi Len, I don't necessarily disagree that it should be priority 1 to make > tables understandable when linearized, but I don't like the example: "a > form > laid out in a table with field labels on the top row and corresponding > fields on the bottom row." > > I believe that complies with the guideline that requires the table to make > sense when linearized. It is normal table behavior for the first row to > label the entire columns, so from the standpoint of the guideline regarding > linearization it should be OK to create a table whose first row contained > labels for the form controls in lower rows. The responsibility then is on > the agent doing the linearization to clearly express the labeling > relationship between the column header and the cell contents. That's > equally > true whether the cell contains a control or any other content. Therefore I > don't see the example as violating this guideline. > > However, the example would violate a second guideline, which is to ensure > that implicitly-associated labels are properly positioned. That is Pri 2 > because it's assumed that the author will comply with the third guideline, > that of providing explicitly-associated labels. > > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wendy A Chisholm [mailto:wendy@w3.org] > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 12:08 PM > To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > Cc: kasday@acm.org > Subject: Fwd: linearized tables > > >Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:39:32 -0500 (EST) > >X-Sender: kasday@pop3.concentric.net > >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 > >Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:41:49 -0500 > >To: "wai-wcag-editor@w3.org" <wai-wcag-editor@w3.org> > >From: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org> > >Cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > >Subject: linearized tables > >Resent-From: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > >X-Mailing-List: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> archive/latest/1144 > >X-Loop: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > >Sender: w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org > >Resent-Sender: w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org > > > >WCAG says > > > >5.3 Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when > >linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an > >alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version). [Priority 2] > > > >This means that someone could use tables for layout in way that the page > >makes no sense and is not usable by any of todays user agents... but still > >get an A conformance rating, because this is only priority 2. > > > >For example, if there's a form laid out in a table with field labels on > >the top row and corresponding fields on the bottom row. > > > >I think the checkpoint needs to be Priority 1. > > > >Len > > > >------- > >Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D. > >Institute on Disabilities/UAP, and > >Department of Electrical Engineering > >Temple University > >423 Ritter Annex, Philadelphia, PA 19122 > > > >kasday@acm.org > >http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday > > > >(215) 204-2247 (voice) > >(800) 750-7428 (TTY) > > -- > wendy a chisholm > world wide web consortium > web accessibility initiative > madison, wi usa > tel: +1 608 663 6346 > /--
Received on Tuesday, 14 March 2000 10:51:45 UTC