R: [wcag2] Layout tables

Jens:
Er, are we really about to encourage authors to use layout tables 'when it
is necessary to use a table for layout' [1]? I find this encouraging since
there'll be of course people saying 'hey, that table is inevitable for me'
because they just don't know how to make it better.


Roberto C:
First of all, there's with an important thing to put in evidence: a "wise"
use of lauyout tables doesn't kiss a web site's accessibility; that's why
layout tables are not to be banned, at least not absolutely. 

In Italy, in this moment, we're having the same discussion on many lists,
and this "table/CSS question" is a accessible web design's myth and is one
of the reasons why many developers perceive accessibility as a big stone
fallen on their head; I'm not saying "well, let's use table in all our
websites", but I'm not sayin' the opposite thing, as I believe there's a
right half way.

I think that it's simply not true that CSS approach excludes layout tables,
and that building an accessibile web site doen't mean to throw layout tabels
in the carbage can. As Maurizio Boscarol said, a simple layout table
(withour nested tables) can help in some case without compromising the whole
job.

In this strange period, we must try and guide the passage from a ruleless
and a jungle web to another one, where accessibility should be resident into
each developer's DNA; in order to obtain this purpose, we must try and
present accessibility as an opportunity, not as a stumbling block to avoid
just because it's too hard to face.

So WCAG WG should, imho, continue to say: "If you want to continue to use
tables, be aware that you may found problems so take care and learn the
right way to do it; anyway, the best way is to avoid layout table and use
CSS only layout".

My best regards,

Roberto Castaldo
-----------------------------------
www.Webaccessibile.Org coordinator
IWA/HWG Member
rcastaldo@webaccessibile.org
r.castaldo@iol.it
Mobile 348 3700161
Icq 178709294
-----------------------------------

Received on Monday, 19 April 2004 07:46:42 UTC