Re: Checkpoint 5.2

At 09:48 AM 2000-12-30 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>I would argue thaqt a table that has a single set of headers for rows, and a
>single set for columns, doesn't have multiple levels of headers. The example
>is where there a headers for other headers.
>
>In other words, the average table of data with a row of headers across the
>top, and a column of headers down one side or the other (or sometimes the
>same headers reproduced at either side, to make life easier) has only one
>logical level of headers.
>
>Tables with two or more levels are those where the row of headers "closest to
>the content" itself has headers. A trivial example would be months, which
>have season headers (and internationalisation problems <grin/>).
>
>Opinions folks?
>

AG::  This issue is a good one for a detour through ER.  Since the basic
question is "how do I tell if I have a complex table (in the terms of the
guidelines) it is an evaluation question.

Since the algorithmic answer which is easy for a tool to do but not so easy
for
a person to do without tool assistance is a big help with this question, it
would be good to get input from ER before resolving this one.

The algorithmic approach is as follows.  Apply the HTML 4.0 header guessing
algorithm, and see what cell to header associations result.  If those are
valid
(manual assessment), the table is simple.  If they are wrong, start marking
the
cell to header associations with explicit markup until the audit tool gets it
right.  

Al

>cheers
>
>Charles McCN
>
>On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Bailey, Bruce wrote:
>
>  Dear Group,
>
>  I respectfully request some clarification on WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 5.2.
>
>  The examples in the Techniques document are very good.  URL:
> 
<<http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#identifying-table-rows-columns>htt
p://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#identifying-table-rows-columns>
>
>  I am left with a nagging question however:  Do the first two examples (cups
>  of coffee per senator) warrant use of the attributes being demonstrated?
>  That is, do ALL non-trivial data  tables have at least two logical levels?
>
>  It seems to me that ANY data table with more than one column (and row)
is at
>  least as complex as the cups of coffee per senators example.  Is the point
>  of those examples just to demonstrate the HTML mechanics of using
attributes
>  like ID and HEADER or is it ALSO providing an example of a "data table with
>  two logical levels"?  If the latter, could someone provide me an example of
>  a "data table with only one logical level"?  Assuming that such examples
are
>  fairly trivial (like the cups of coffee per senator, but with only one
>  senator listed) let me also suggest that this checkpoint would be MUCH more
>  understandable if it the disclaimer phrase "that have two or more logical
>  levels of row or column headers" were deleted.  (Actually, I am hoping that
>  I am reading 5.2 wrong and that simple straightforward two dimensional
>  tables are okay so long as TD and TH are used appropriately.
>
>  Thanks for your time.
>  If I missed the a clarification in the archives, my apologies, please point
>  me in the right direction.
>  Bruce Bailey
>  US Dept of Education
>
>
>-- 
>Charles McCathieNevile    <mailto:charles@w3.org>mailto:charles@w3.org   
phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                     
<http://www.w3.org/WAI>http://www.w3.org/WAI
>Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
>until 6 January 2001 at:
>W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,
France
>

Received on Saturday, 30 December 2000 14:17:58 UTC