W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2014

RE: Layout Tables With Summary Attributes

From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 08:24:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5dec4691cff4292510edbf50869d5617@mail.gmail.com>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
[Ramon wrote] "Regarding the original question, I would say that a layout
table with @summary is conveying different "info and relationships" to the
blind user, so I would probably mark it as a failure of SC 1.3.1."

Yes, I agree with Ramon, it is definitely a failure of F46
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20130905/F46

Best Regards,

Jonathan


-----Original Message-----
From: Ramón Corominas [mailto:listas@ramoncorominas.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 7:13 AM
To: J. Albert Bowden
Cc: Bourne, Sarah (ITD); Homme, James; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: Layout Tables With Summary Attributes

J. Albert wrote:

> pretty sure summary attribute is deprecated i use caption element
> instead

I think @summary and <caption> have very different purposes. @summary was
intended to "explain" the table structure so the blind user can more or
less understand how to navigate the cells. <caption> is just an
identification for the table, not for its structure.

There has been much discussion about deprecating @summary, but I think it
was not because of its usefullness but because there are other means to do
the same (although they are not so well accessibility supported, I guess).


Regarding the original question, I would say that a layout table with
@summary is conveying different "info and relationships" to the blind
user, so I would probably mark it as a failure of SC 1.3.1.

Cheers!
Ramón.
Received on Saturday, 22 February 2014 13:25:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:50 UTC