- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "'Boris Zbarsky'" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'Gez Lemon'" <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "'Steve Faulkner'" <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>, "'Gregory J. Rosmaita'" <oedipus@hicom.net>, "'W3C WAI-XTECH'" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "'www-archive'" <www-archive@w3.org>, "'Janina Sajka'" <janina@rednote.net>, "'Sam Ruby'" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>
Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > John Foliot wrote: > > It is becoming increasingly clear that, as Josh O'Connor wrote [1], there > > needs to be a disambiguation of @summary, and clear, precise guidance on > > its usage, which evidence is showing was clearly lacking in HTML4 (i.e. > > better "specify that technology"). However I seriously question > > jettisoning @summary for @datastructure simply to address existing holes > > in usage and intent of @summary. > > I didn't suggest "jettisoning". See above, and in particular the quoted > part of my post. I'm suggesting having @summary work exactly as it does > now in UAs and maybe adding a less-misuse-prone attribute that we > recommend web developers use. That's all operating on the assumption > that we do in fact want to have an attribute for describing the data > relationships in a table. I have no opinion as to whether we do. > Boris, If it appeared that I was suggesting that _you_ proposed jettisoning @summary that was not my intent and I apologize if it came off that way. As it currently stands, HTML5 is proposing to abandon @summary, which is under serious contention right now. Your suggestion appears to me to be very similar to the general thrust of the argument put forth by Charles McCathieNevile [1], and fits with a model that I personally would be comfortable with. JF [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0275.html
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 17:07:51 UTC