WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Using Tables

for

From: Vincent Young
Date: Feb 11, 2012 9:12PM

> loading a script to get super cool features is again, a waste.

Fair enough, but don't agree. With my work, it depends on the
situation/project. The file is 3,335 bytes that are included in my library
JavaScript file. The amount of download and rendering time in IE8 and
below typically have not made enough of a difference.

> Check out Steve's work at http://html5accessibility.com/ far too many
html5 "features" have the not supported or not implemented mark to use them

I had seen this article and it's a good read, but for me, it's all the more
reason to continue to try and use these elements. We'll just write this
off as a difference in ideology about incorporating things on the web that
have not made it into the W3C PR. I will of course encourage as many
developers to continue to use and push HTML5. I think the web will become
better as a result.


On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Ryan E. Benson < <EMAIL REMOVED> >wrote:

> > Doing so is fairly easy with solutions such as html5shiv (
> http://code.google.com/p/html5shiv/).
> Only problem with that is, more stuff to load. Pages often load tons
> of scripts to make this little ajax box or whatever, loading a script
> to get super cool features is again, a waste.
>
> > the HTML5 elements that are being exposed by AT. I guess it all depends
> on
> > the environment, so your reasoning makes sense. For me, HTML5 is just
> too
> > fun to wait!
> Check out Steve's work at http://html5accessibility.com/, far too many
> html5 "features" have the not supported or not implemented mark to use
> them, which is some of my reasoning as to why I say HTML5 is not
> mature enough. If you say if we use them browsers will have to make
> them work. Ok, while not the direct same, Google still has issues with
> accessibility on all of their products and cannot produce valid code,
> yet it has employees on almost all W3C WG.
>
> --
> Ryan E. Benson
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Vincent Young < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
> >> Jumping on the band wagon before HTML5 is even a PR is just a little
> >> preemptive for me. At work we are still on IE8, even boxes running
> >> Win7, so doing HTML5 for example, is just a waste of time for now.
> >
> > Even if running on older systems, incorporating most HTML5 into your work
> > now probably does more good than harm. Doing so is fairly easy with
> > solutions such as html5shiv (http://code.google.com/p/html5shiv/). When
> > you're ready to upgrade your systems, no hassle and users can begin to
> use
> > the HTML5 elements that are being exposed by AT. I guess it all depends
> on
> > the environment, so your reasoning makes sense. For me, HTML5 is just
> too
> > fun to wait!
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Ryan E. Benson < <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Steve,
> >> > many aspects of HTML5 are here right now and being used so it makes
> sense
> >> > take it into account.Part of the accessibility support problem is/has
> >> been
> >> > that what is in specs and what is supported are not always the same
> >> thing.
> >> > As accessibility practitioners we need to be mindful of this and
> provide
> >> > best practise advice based on implementation realities.
> >> Jumping on the band wagon before HTML5 is even a PR is just a little
> >> preemptive for me. At work we are still on IE8, even boxes running
> >> Win7, so doing HTML5 for example, is just a waste of time for now.
> >> --
> >> Ryan E. Benson
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 4:14 AM, Steve Faulkner
> >> < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> >> > Hi Ryan,
> >> > "I have ignored what HTML 5 says for the most part cause it isn't
> done,
> >> > and kind of chuckle at it. I think people who are using it and writing
> >> > books about it are doing it prematurely."
> >> >
> >> > many aspects of HTML5 are here right now and being used so it makes
> sense
> >> > take it into account.Part of the accessibility support problem is/has
> >> been
> >> > that what is in specs and what is supported are not always the same
> >> thing.
> >> > As accessibility practitioners we need to be mindful of this and
> provide
> >> > best practise advice based on implementation realities.
> >> >
> >> > best regards
> >> > Stevef
> >> >
> >> > The summary attribute is not and has never been well supported across
> >> > browsers and AT, so using it to provide important information, means
> it
> >> is
> >> > not available to some users who would benefit from the information.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 11 February 2012 05:07, Ryan E. Benson < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have ignored what HTML 5 says for the most part cause it isn't
> done,
> >> >> and kind of chuckle at it. I think people who are using it and
> writing
> >> >> books about it are doing it prematurely.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Still, it doesn't make much sense to me to
> >> >> > present the purpose to screen reader users only.
> >> >> The flip side is why do screen readers allow you to jump between
> >> >> tables? I think until you can tie a visual element (thinking a
> heading
> >> >> here) to a table a summary is needed. Summaries are usually required
> >> >> for where I work due to their nature, and couldn't really be broken
> >> >> down effectively.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Ryan E. Benson
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Jared Smith < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
> >> >> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Ryan E. Benson wrote:
> >> >> >> What makes you say that Jared? The spec (html 4) says the exact
> >> opposite
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I guess I misunderstood this, probably because when summary was
> still
> >> >> > in HTML5 it was defined as for structure only. Still, it doesn't
> make
> >> >> > much sense to me to present the purpose to screen reader users
> only.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > My point is that if a table is natively clear and accessible,
> >> >> > providing a summary won't make it more accessible. And if it's not
> >> >> > natively accessible, then it needs to be made accessible.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Jared
> >> >> >