Re: PF Response: @Summary

A month ago, Laura Carlson clarified the need for @summary:

Thu, 4 Jun 2009 06:57:42 -0500
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0185.html

> In the absence of a summary, the non-visual user must investigate the
> table carefully and fully, merely in order to ascertain whether or not
> it is the correct table, what information the table contains, if the
> information in the table is germane, how many rows by how many columns
> to expect, the flow of the table, etc.

[And later discussion suggested that may it really ought to have been
named @datastructure instead of @summary]

What information should the summary contain that should *not* be in
the headers or the caption?

Would the @summary purpose be better fulfilled by just ensuring that
it was easy to read the headers as a sort a preview?

[I realize that not all tables are properly marked up with <th> -- but
I'm assuming (incorrectly?) that authors who can't get that right are
unlikely to get an invisible attribute right anyhow.]

[My apologies to those whose Cc status I wasn't sure about.]

-jJ

Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 02:51:45 UTC