Re: HTML Table Markup

>Checkers need to get better.  Layout tables are an oxy moron since tables
>are for holding tabular data.
>
>Johnnie Apple Seed

Of course checkers need to get better.  One way to help them is to create 
a convention for identifying layout tables that don't and shouldn't need 
additional table mark-up and should be converted to CSS layout.  Do you 
have another suggestion?

Tina, David, Ineke, and others,

I started the thread [1] with the following:

<quote>
Please do not include a discussion about whether to use CSS verses tables 
for layout.  We already agree that CSS is the preferred solution.  Whether 

we use CSS or tables for layout is not the disability issue, what really 
matters is that the reading order is logical when linearized.  For example 

when CSS is off or not available, or when using a magnifier or screen 
reader software to navigate the content in a logical order. 
<end quote>

Do you have another suggestion on how to identify the millions of layout 
tables that need to be converted to CSS layout? 

Regards,
Phill Jenkins
IBM Worldwide Accessibility Center


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2004JulSep/0464.html