- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 10:29:25 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- cc: WAI WCAG List <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
If there were a regular way to describe the layout it could be useful. If sections had purposes that could be defined, it would be possible to build tools that shifted chunks around (converting the layout to CSS for example) to give people a layout like the one they are used to. This is already possible with properly marked-up data tables, of course. But filling the summary attribute seems a limited approach. Some work has been done on using RDF to describe navigation of web content - at both a site and page level, because the distinction is arbitrary and related to the particular site's choices about size, more than about wildly different functions, in many cases. It would be possible to leverage this, applying the relevant bits to tables. Chaals On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Chris Ridpath wrote: > >> Layout tables should have a summary of "". >> >I agree that all tables should have a summary. But, is it not helpful for >some layout tables to have a summary that describes their layout? Would >people with cognitive impairments find this helpful? Would some screen >reader users find this helpful? > >I believe that we've now reached a point in our discussions where user >agents and checking tools can reliably determine the table purpose. User >agents can then have an option of giving the user the layout table summaries >or not. > >Chris > -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles tel: +61 409 134 136 SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78 22 Post: 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia or W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 10:29:26 UTC