Re: Table Techniques - Summary

Perfect. I fully agree to your post, related to XHTML WG coordination as
well as all imponderableness the topic brings along. Finally, the entire model
has to be revised.


Regards,
 Jens.



> Does the subject line mean "summary of table techniques" or "table
> techniques for the summary attribute"? Quick, LD-boosters-- make subject
> lines like this illegal on the Web!
> 
> > Layout tables must not have a summary (not even a NULL summary). This
> > reverses our earlier decision that layout tables may have a summary.
> >
> > The rationale behind the no summary rule is:
> > - layout tables should not be used (use CSS)
> 
> As long as HTML4 and XHTML 1.0 are W3C recommendations, people can use
> tables for layout if they want. You don't have to like them, but they *are
> not prohibited for layout*. The spec merely says "Tables should not be
> used purely as a means to lay[ ]out document content as this may present
> problems when rendering to non-visual media." "Should not" does not mean
> "must not," and I challenge advocates of all-CSS-all-the-time design to
> provide a list of current "non-visual media" that cannot handle layout
> tables.
> 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/tables.html#h-11.1>
> 
> CSS layouts are better in myriad ways and tremendously desirable, but
> tables are not prohibited, nor should they be. WAI is not a higher power
> than the W3C's own HTML working group.
> 
> > - it appears that layout tables will be deprecated in XHTML2
> 
> XHTML2 is even farther away from ratification than WCAG 2 and has no
> bearing on our deliberations here.
> 
> > - the function of the layout table summary can be better expressed
> elsewhere
> 
> Again with the misconception that anyone gives a damn that the table, an
> underlying HTML structure invisible to the visitor, is used for layout.
> You don't need to "express" the "function of the... summary" at all. Just
> use your table for layout. Don't get all meta on us.
> 
> > - we should not require a NULL summary just to make the author "jump
> through
> > hoops"
> 
> That isn't much a hoop to jump through. This esteemed working group
> separately and elsewhere tentatively proposes that authors must police how
> many nouns come in a row and add vowel markings to Hebrew, as though we
> were children or something. summary="" is *nothing*. It's trivial.
> 
> summary="" and an absent summary are so similar that the former should not
> be prohibited.
> 
> > Data tables must have a valid summary.
> 
> Why every single data table? What if it's a 2x2-cell table that perfectly
> explicates itself? Why "make the author 'jump through hoops'"?
> 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/tables.html#adef-summary>
> 
> summary is an *optional* attribute in HTML. If you leave it out, your
> table will still validate. Explain how WAI can require an attribute that
> the W3C (X)HTML spec itself does not require.
> 
> > Proposed description of a valid summary:
> > The summary must describe the relationship between cells.
> 
> The myriad table *headers* do that. Yet again the WAI WCAG WG (take your
> pick) wants the entire Web turned into words words words, except inasmuch
> as words are prohibited or tightly regulated because a learning-disabled
> person may find them confusing at some unspecified future date.
> 
> WAI (sic) has a poor record in explicating the true requirements for table
> accessibility, and this is not making things better.
> 
> > The summary does not have a maximum length.
> 
> The (X)HTML spec doesn't say there is one, so the statement above is
> meaningless.
> 
> > The summary must not contain placeholder text.
> 
> True. Not even a space character.
> 
> > If the summary is less than 20 characters then it is suspicious.
> 
> That's very amusing. You realize how compact Chinese and Japanese can be,
> right?
> 
> Here we go again with telling people how to write.
> 
> > Can the summary just link to another document (kinda like a longdesc)?
> 
> No. Like alt, it cannot contain markup. WAI WCAG WG (or whoever) should
> know that already, but then again, considerable ignorance of the HTML spec
> has already been demonstrated.
> 
> > What if the table is summarized in the document - do you still require a
> > summary attribute?
> 
> No.
> 
> Glad to see this has all reached the stage of "resolution." Too bad it
> stinks.
> 
> --
> 
>   Joe Clark  |  joeclark@joeclark.org
>   Author, _Building Accessible Websites_
>   <http://joeclark.org/access/> | <http://joeclark.org/book/>
> 


-- 
Jens Meiert

Steubenstr. 28
D-26123 Oldenburg

Mobil +49 (0)175 78 4146 5
Telefon +49 (0)441 99 86 147
Telefax +49 (0)89 1488 2325 91

Mail <jens@meiert.com>
Internet <http://meiert.com>

Received on Friday, 8 August 2003 05:44:28 UTC