Re: [#293] Summary for tables

 <table type="layout" />

The TABLE element does not have a TYPE attribute in HTML4 so, as Roberto
suggested, this would cause problems.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html#edef-TABLE

Even if approved by the XHTML group this would cause problems with HTML
validator tools.

Chris


----- Original Message -----
From: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
To: "Jens Meiert" <jens.meiert@erde3.com>; "Chris Ridpath"
<chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 5:07 AM
Subject: Re: [#293] Summary for tables


>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jens Meiert" <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
> To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 3:21 AM
> Subject: RE: [#293] Summary for tables
>
>
> >
> > > Using "class" may not be perfect but it will be used very infrequently
> (I
> > > guess) and defining this CSS class should not cause much hindrance to
> the
> > > author.
> >
> >
> > The idea sounds great, but I rather suggest a 'type' attribute for
tables
> > (which really expresses the way it is used), like
> >
> >    <table type="layout" />
> >
> > thus implying e.g. an optional 'data' value. This is obviously no CSS
> > matter, and so there is no need for use of the class attribute, and the
> proposed
> > type attribute would clearly make a difference between tables used
either
> for
> > layout or data -- solving an important Accessibility problem.
> >
> > By the way, if this attribute would be introduced you could pass on
> caption
> > or th elements (in layout tables), according to a real simplification (I
> am
> > no friend of these elements, either).
> >
>
> I've think also about this option but this must be approved by the XHTML
> Working Group and/or how could it be applied to the older version (HTML
4.x)
> ?
>
>

Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 09:14:33 UTC