- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 10:50:06 -0400
- To: "rcorominas@technosite.es" <rcorominas@technosite.es>
- CC: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Jared Smth <jared@webaim.com>
- Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP91FD3F498E4EEC807011FAFE230@phx.gbl>
I've closed the issue due to insufficient support for an explicit failure. On a separate note, I would like comments from Steve, Leonié, Alestair, Ramón, Sailesh, Jared etc. Say, you are evaluating a public facing site with a layout table mising role=presentation which is announced as a data table in JAWS, VO, NVDA and in the API. Do you (1) flag a best practice and suggest they add role=presentation knowing that many companies filter out best practices when entering things into the remediation cue, or (2) flag it as a failure of 1.3.1 given that the information is not data, but presented as such. Or (3) pass it Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613.235.4902 LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> www.Can-Adapt.com * Adapting the web to all users* * Including those with disabilities* If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Ramón Corominas <rcorominas@technosite.es> wrote: > @Loretta: I agree that a sufficient technique is a better approach. > > @Steve: adding role="presentation" to a <table> element does not change > the table markup, so it would be still a misuse of the spec, so in reality > the <table> should be changed to <div> with classes and so on. > > In any case, my main concern is that the addition of role="presentation" > is not as easy as it sounds... > > Imagine that we have a web tool for an intranet that was created using > layout tables, and that was originally tested for conformance with the > specific set of OS, browser and AT defined by the organization. In this > closed environment, layout tables are properly ignored (even if this is > done through "desperate attemps" of the AT to ignore them). IMO, the fact > is that they are "supported". The tool contains also normal data tables, > properly marked with <caption>, <th> and so on, so it has both layout > tables and data tables mixed together in the same page. > > In this scenario, adding a role="presentation" only to layout tables is > not trivial, and the task cannot be easily automated. indeed, the automated > process would need to re-create the same desperate heuristics that the AT > is already performing, so the effort to "technically conform" could be huge > while the practical benefit for the users would be null. > > > I would also like to know what are the conditions that a failure must > meet, it seems that there are different opinions. In any case, from my > experience many developers and evaluators consider failures as "normative > rules" that always prevent conformance, but my understanding is that they > should be treated as informative only. Therefore, they should be considered > under accessibility support in the specific usage context, especially when > we are monitoring an existing website that was marked as "valid" prior to > the existence of the Failure. > > Regards, > Ramón. > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2014 14:50:38 UTC