- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:29:17 -0500
- To: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
the problem with the stake holder list, is that some of them can change and some of them cannot. I suggest the checkers become more sophistocated. I do not know how this is done, but it seems to me that those of us who rely on accurate rendering are being held hostage by the checkers in this case. I disagree that summary should not be read automatically. Where appropriate and it is difficult to say where is appropriate when there are so many inappropriate ways to use summary apparently, If I hear a data table with the automatic reading of the summary, it makes perfect sense. It even makes more sense that not hearing it makes and not hearing it might imply that it is not there so automatic reading of summary is in my estimation what should be allowable but at the same time it should not be used as a stick to say well, it should not be read automatically. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phill Jenkins" <pjenkins@us.ibm.com> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 3:06 PM Subject: RE: User agent support of SUMMARY attribute in tables >Which would be preferable; no summary attribute, or a null summary attribute >(summary=""). The null attribute and the missing attribute are hard to tell apart except when in source reading mode. I would recommend a reserved keyword such as "layout" in the summary. The screen readers can be programmed to ignore "layout" just as easily as "quote quote" and the fact that the source still has the "layout" keyword is useful to the author and source code reader. I think it is important that we remember the requirements of all the stake holders; including screen reader users sighted users authors checkers & repair tools browsers etc. We could also lobby for a new semantic tag, such as <layoutable>, but getting that added to XHTML would never happen with the existence of CSS, and would still break in older browsers and screen readers. Giving up on using tables and just using CSS for positioning is also a problem for older browser users. So I still come back to my suggested convention of the keyword approach <table summary="layout" yada yada yada.. Regards, Phill Jenkins, IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center http://www.ibm.com/able
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:30:28 UTC