- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:52:17 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Catherine Roy <ecrire@catherine-roy.net>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, Philip TAYLOR <p.taylor@rhul.ac.uk>, Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>, Roger Johansson <roger@456bereastreet.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Sam Ruby wrote: >> Ian Hickson wrote: >>> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Sam Ruby wrote: >>>>> I presume, from your e-mail, that you do not consider this to be debate: >>>>> >>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0173.html >>>> | > * We need summary for backward compatibility. >>>> | >>>> | HTML5 supports implementing the summary="" attribute for backwards >>>> | compatibility as currently written. >>>> >>>> ... is an example of what Laura describes as "selectively choosing >>>> those points in a subject which happen to favor a position, while >>>> ignoring the rest". >>> What were the points that were ignored here? >> The fact that summary is non-conforming. > > Is that relevant to issues of backwards-compatibility? I was under the > impression that it was not. I wasn't trying to ignore that or selectively > chose a point here. Search for "backward compatibility" here: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SummaryForTABLE#head-222af24a2b1dcdc3afe5e3036551b70f99cf232c It is entirely possible that the two of you are using this term in different ways -- you narrowly concerning only browser vendors, and Laura inclusively to include authoring tools. >>>> Another, more recent, example is "The browser vendors are the >>>> ultimate gatekeepers, of course". >>> What points does this ignore? I don't understand. >> The fact that no behavior is being asked of the browser vendors. > > If UAs do nothing with summary="", it won't have any effect on > accessibility. So unless I'm misundertanding something fundamental, this > is false. But you didn't say "The UAs are the ultimate gatekeepers". You said "Browser Vendors". In any case, Mike Smith correctly noted[1] that "... they're certainly not the ultimate gatekeepers as far as decisions about document conformance." >> The fact that I did not comment on the remainder of the post you cited >> is an indication that I believe that it did further the dialog. > > This is encouraging; however, it seems that Laura does not share your > view, so it would be helpful is Laura could explain why. She might not, and her responding may be helpful; but at this point I will add that your responses to me on this thread reinforce the notion that you are "making every effort to look right no matter what the facts may be." > Cheers, - Sam Ruby [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0652.html
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 12:53:05 UTC