Re: HTML Table Markup

> I request we consider the following clarification:
>
> Proposal -- 5.1 requires the addition of header
> rows or columns for data tables, if not already
> present, for P2 conformance.
>

I was seeking clarification for the WCAG2 because it will soon supersede the
WCAG1. This table discussion falls under WCAG2 guideline 1.3 (level 1,
success criteria 1). It's much more broad then 5.1.
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040730/#content-structure-separation

Chris


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 3:02 PM
Subject: RE: HTML Table Markup


> > In practice, I think we just discuss on the list until the screaming
stops.
>
> That sounds exactly right!
>
> > We could include this exemption only for P1 compliance.
> > For P2, all data tables would require header markup.
>
> This sounds good, but...
>
> > Proposal - a small data table has less than 4 rows and less than 4
columns.
> > Proposal still on the table - small data tables do not require header
markup.
>
> Okay, I started this discussion, does that give me any veto power?
> In any case, I move we suspend the discussion on the definition of
"small".
> Such a distinction does nothing to move towards resolution of my initial
question!
> I introduced the discussion of "small data tables" because it seemed to
simplify the question.  It has, instead, moved us to a tangent.  I see no
advantage to defining "small" at this juncture.  Indeed, WCAG2 is struggling
with threshold values elsewhere, so it seem prudent to avoid this
distinction if we can.
>
> I request we consider the following clarification:
>
> Proposal -- 5.1 requires the addition of header rows or columns for data
tables, if not already present, for P2 conformance.
>

Received on Friday, 10 September 2004 19:24:42 UTC