- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 16:29:15 -0800
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 05:39 PM 3/8/01 -0500, Al Gilman wrote:
>If we can't allow an author to structure their work by defining the layout
>structure first, then populating it with content for the
>layout regions, and then answering a few questions that clarify points
>required for non-graphical interpretation of the contents, I expect we are
>in trouble.
I'll drink to that! In fact that may be how most pages are built. We seem
to be stuck on the idea that there are *real* tables and then there are
layout tables, when in fact the former are merely an almost trivial case of
the latter which, to most people with nerdlessness is what tables *really*
are. So-called data tables in that view are simply one way to depict
"stuff" which may or may not have the old row/column relationship. Just as
spread sheets are used for a lot of unrelated to the usual, so tables are a
conceptual entity usually described visually - but not necessarily so.
One of the reasons for eschewing "layout tables" (dumb access systems)
probably isn't all that big a deal any more?
--
Love.
ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2001 19:30:02 UTC