If we are discussing modifying H63 to include scope shouldn't we use a simpler table than the example (one without these extra H3 cells in the table)? Regards, James On Oct 19, 2013, at 8:55 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote: > Hi Sailesh and all > > I tested the table with NVDA, VoiceOver and Jaws and updated results after > the tables on the page below. > http://davidmacd.com/test/sailesh-table-test.ht > > Cheers > David MacDonald > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:spanchang02@yahoo.com] > Sent: October 17, 2013 11:21 PM > To: WCAG; Joshue O Connor > Subject: Action item: table with TH with and without scope > > Survey items #9 and 11:: > The comments in May 2013 were primarily influenced because of better > support for the scope attribute by JAWS and NVDA. > NVDA 2012 like JAWS read all cells marked up as TH to the left of current > cell (in column header rows) and all cells marked up as TH above current > cell for row header cells. (NVDA 2013 does not do so now) And I was using an > older version of FF in April / May. > Hence changes were suggested to H63 and H51 (survey items 9 and 11. > This comment was never submitted as a new technique but suggested a few > changes to the existing technique. > Representing it as a new technique in the survey is not appropriate. > For H63 survey item#9: The example refers to a 'published schedule' but the > code that follows that is a contact info table. > That contact Info table is from a link of the Resources page for H63. > Here is a link to tables marked up with TH with and without the scope > attribute. > http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/Table_scopeDemo.htm > > Regards, > Sailesh > > > >Received on Saturday, 19 October 2013 16:11:25 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:54 UTC