W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2003

RE: User agent support of SUMMARY attribute in tables

From: John Foliot - bytown internet <foliot@bytowninternet.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:47:49 -0500
To: "W3c-Wai-Ig" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "Jon Hanna" <jon@spin.ie>
Message-ID: <GKEFJJEKDDIMBHJOGLENKEJIDBAA.foliot@bytowninternet.com>

If the warning was interpreted as nothing more than a warning then OK, I can
live with that.  The real problem is that many of the decision makers do not
look at the techo-goop within the report, they look for a "Pass" or "Fail"
at the top of the page; cut-and-dried, black and white, simplistic and easy
to digest.  They don't want to have to think about it, they just need to
confirm to the next level up the ladder that "the job has been done".  Thus
Bobby fails in that it delivers to the wrong audience... rather than helping
the developers make informed decisions and correct real problems, it has
been set up to be the Pass or Fail mechanism for Management.  And don't
think that's not why Watchfire bought Bobby... to add to their suite of
reporting tools, because the corner office needs to know answers to
questions quickly, simply and "positively".

This is not supposition, I have personally lived through this.  I once had
to go into a VP's office and explain to him a WebTrends report, and attempt
to explain why usage reports based on server logs cannot be "accurate", but
rather indicative (due to browser cache, server cache, browser spoofing,
etc.).  Fortunately, he was both patient, wise and curious; the meeting went
well but was illuminating for both him and me.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Jon Hanna
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 9:19 AM
> To: W3c-Wai-Ig
> Subject: RE: User agent support of SUMMARY attribute in tables
> > perhaps we can persuade the folks on bobby development to add some table
> > analesis that does not require that the summary attrib be present
> > in an lay
> > out table.  Or, we could use the tool as intended and if need
> be, explain
> > that we fail because the tool is incorrect?
> I see nothing wrong with Bobby warning about layout tables having
> no summary
> attribute. Every time a table doesn't have a summary attribute someone
> should examine the question of whether it should.
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 09:47:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:13 UTC