- From: kath moonan <kath.moonan@poptech.coop>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:24:37 -0000
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Dear WAI group, I am currently working on a Priority 3 site and I'm trying to make sense of the guidelines which I feel conflict in their advice about the use of tables for layout. The sites we build have a dynamic linearised text only version provided by the BBC's Betsie. Checkpoint 5.3 says "Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version <wcag10-tech.html>). [Priority 2] " This seems to me to suggest it's ok to use tables as long as a linearised is provided, however guideline 3.3 says "Use style sheets to control layout and presentation. [Priority 2] Which is correct? Simple layout tables with a dynamic linearised equivalent or pure CSSP with tables only used for tabularised data? Our company has built a Priority 3 site before www.dialuk.org.uk We didn't use any layout tables but we found using CSSP frustrating, time consuming and the browser differences downright painful. We are having the tables vs. CSSP discussion again as we understand that the guidelines are intended to aid designers in creating accessible web sites and they are open to interpretation. We are most concerned with enhancing the experience for our end user, I'd very much appreciate advice on best practice and user experience. So are layout tables ok for a priority 3 site providing there is a summary and we provide a dynamic, configurable linearised version of each page? Many thanks in advance Kath " Does CSSp * Kath Moonan Web Designer & Accessibility Consultant Poptel Technology dd: 44 (0)20 7704 3941 2nd Floor 13 Swan Yard London N1 1SD <http://www.popteltechnology.coop> *
Received on Thursday, 30 January 2003 12:25:53 UTC