- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:45:43 -0500
- To: "Chris Brainerd" <Chris.Brainerd@cds.hawaii.edu>, "Al Gilman" <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, "WAI GL (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Good point, Chris. There are actually two issues here: 1. Whether WCAG 2.0 should require use a summary attribute for data tables; and 2. The quality of the summary's contents. The first issue is within our purview; the second one isn't, at least not in the same way. In another of your posts, I think I heard you mention that testing had indicated that the summary sometimes provides Too Much Information. Were the tests conducted by blind people who are regular screen reader users? Or by sighted developers listening to the pages? I ask this because I've seen pretty consistent splits along these lines, and I'm curious. John 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: Chris Brainerd [mailto:Chris.Brainerd@cds.hawaii.edu] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 6:10 pm To: Al Gilman; WAI GL (E-mail) Subject: RE: [#293] Summary for tables If screen readers speak the summary attribute you may be contributing to web page 'noise' while not providing useful information to the user. This reminds me of well-intentioned but poor advice to add ALT text to every image, even those used solely for decoration. Chris Brainerd Instructional Designer Real Choices ACCESS Center on Disability Studies University of Hawaii Chris.brainerd@cds.hawaii.edu 808-956-9356 -----Original Message----- From: Al Gilman [mailto:asgilman@iamdigex.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 8:45 AM To: WAI GL (E-mail) Subject: Re: [#293] Summary for tables This comment from Phill Jenkins: -- The summary attribute was not discussed in the June 9th proposal. It is the one attribute unique to layout and data tables that could be used to help confirm that, in fact the should's and must's have been followed and in fact this table is or is not a layout table. The convention I have been proposing is to use the keyword "layout" in the summary attribute text. When the table is a layout table, the summary attribute text SHOULD include the text word "layout". When the table is a data table, the summary attribute text SHOULD NOT include the text word "layout". This convention will help checking and repair tools, authoring tools, users, and assistive technology better create, repair, identify, and render tables as intended. Of course tools could assume that because of the presence or absence of TH the table is or is not a data table, but the presence of the "layout" will confirm the intent that it is a layout table. Phill Jenkins -- [June 9th proposal is a reference to a lightly edited re-send of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003AprJun/0290.html in which the reason for leaving SUMMARY out got left out. Compare with http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2003AprJun/0133.html]
Received on Thursday, 19 June 2003 09:45:55 UTC