Re: H43 and header cell relationships

Does someone has completed recent test whether the implicit header are
supported by AT?

It seems to be allowed within the HTML5 spec. [1]

---
[1]
On Tue Nov 6 2012, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > About "headers" I wonder if this would be acceptable:
> >
> > <tr><th id="th1" colspan="2">MySection</th></tr>
> > <tr><th id="th2" headers="th1"
scope="row">MyName</th><td>MyData</td></tr>
> > <tr><th id="th3" headers="th2" scope="row">+
MySubName</th><td>MySubData</td></tr>
> >
> > as for the third row, the th1 header is implicit from the th2 declared
header
>
> Yup, that is allowed and is defined to work as you'd expect.
(source:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-November/037791.html
)


:-)

Pierre Dubois


On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Jonathan Avila
<jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>wrote:

> Olaf, the first step I would do is to try to validate or disprove the
> possibility of a nesting/serial access approach.  Is it possible to design
> a table where a references b and b references c but a should not reference
> c?  If that's possible then you can't rely on this serial type approach.
>
> Jonathan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olaf Drümmer [mailto:olaf@druemmer.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 5:19 PM
> To: W3C WAI ig; Matt Tongue
> Cc: Olaf Drümmer
> Subject: Re: H43 and header cell relationships
>
> I think I have to correct my statement:
> HTML seems to require (as Sailesh points out) that indeed the headers
> attribute of table cell has to list the ids of all the header cells with
> which it is associated.
>
> Sorry for any confusion my statement might have caused.
>
> I nevertheless would like to add that I think that this approach is
> conceptually wrong - nested semantic structure should be expressed via
> nested representation of pertinent data / attributes. Even if one were to
> agree though with my reasoning it's probably a bit late in the game to
> have this addressed...
>
>
> Olaf
>
>
>
> On 19 Feb 2014, at 22:46, Olaf Drümmer <olaf@druemmer.com> wrote:
>
> > As far as I can tell, any cell should identify only its direct header
> cell parents. Nested header cell relationships would then be represented
> by nested use of the headers attribute.
> >
> > Olaf
> >
> > On 19 Feb 2014, at 22:09, "Tongue, Matt" <Matt.Tongue@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
> wrote:
> >
> >> When marking up a table with multiple levels of headings, is it
> mandatory to always put all header cell IDs into the headers attribute of
> a cell?
> >>
> >> For example, if a data cell has 3 header cells, but the 2nd header
> cell's headers attribute references the 1st header's ID, would it not
> suffice for the data cell to just reference header cells 2 and 3, since
> header cell 2 references header cell 1 (thus creating a relationship
> already)? Or must every header always be identified for every cell, no
> matter what?
> >>
> >> Reference: http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20130905/H43
> >>
> >
> >
>
>