- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:58:40 -0400
- To: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
The only reason to use null summary would be the same as for null alt. If, without null summary, something would be rendered that would be as gibberish than using a null summary would be good. I'd like to teach developpers the difference between a data table and a lay out table if they don't know and this is one of them. I like your example and find the captions, although my screen reader does not render them as captions, helpfull as well. My main concern is that today, we see increasing use/over use of the summary attribute when it comes to lay out and this only makes for clutter on the braille display or in the ear and I suspect in other modalities as well where it is rendered and announced. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John M Slatin" <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu> To: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@comcast.net>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 11:43 AM Subject: RE: [#293] Summary for tables Excellent points about the difference between a data table and an image; I aboslutely agree that the summary doesn't serve as "equivalent alternative" for the table, but rather as an explanatory or descriptive statement to irent the user to the table. The reason I suggested the possibility of a null summary for both data and layout tables is that for some relatively straightforward data tables the <caption> element can provide sufficient information, and it seems pointless to insist on having a non-empty summary in such cases. Ideally, of course, the summary and <caption> provide complementary information. For example, on the course schedule page at http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~slatin/webaccess/2002/schedule2002.htm, I used the <caption> element to display the titles for the course units, while the summary attribute gives the date range for that unit. The rationale for this is that sighted users can quickly get the date range by scanning the page, whereas people using screen readers would otherwise have to listen to the entire schedule-block to find out where it ends. John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Institute for Technology & Learning University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu web http://www.ital.utexas.edu -----Original Message----- From: David Poehlman [mailto:poehlman1@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 4:03 pm To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: [#293] Summary for tables I would like to submit that Although I support the null summary for lay out tables if the null summary actually works as a null rather than putting some sort of flag that the screen reader or other rendering agent will speak/render, Alt and summary are two different things. In a data table which is quite complex, it is often a good idea for usability for a narrative to be provided as part of the table such as in a summary in order to get the big picture of the table. This is more like narative description than alt/replacement for the table since It provides an overview and possibly some instructive information concerning the table and the data in it. A data table is not a graphical element as such but is a structural element or block of structural elements holding textual relationships, while though benefitting vision are not enherent to it since tactually and via use of a screen reader or other device which allows appropriate navigation, the relationships among the data and data sets can be discerned. I propose then that null summary be used for lay out tables as per my comments above, and that summary be used with appropriate content for data tables but that the later might be constrained by the complexity of the structure. In other words on the second point, some times, there is nothing to say beyond the rendering of the table so a null summary would be acceptable. Thanks for allowing me to intrude.
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2003 12:01:05 UTC