E-mail List Archives
Re: complex layout tables
From: Steve Faulkner
Date: Jan 30, 2014 3:02AM
- Next message: Johnson, Melissa: "Reading tables in JAWS"
- Previous message: Steve Faulkner: "Re: complex layout tables"
- Next message in Thread: James Nurthen: "Re: complex layout tables"
- Previous message in Thread: Steve Faulkner: "Re: complex layout tables"
- View all messages in this Thread
I have also mailed the HTML WG
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
On 30 January 2014 09:46, Steve Faulkner < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> thanks Olaf, I am aware of the RFC and what the statements mean.
> I have filed a bug against the HTML5 spec
> to make the advice against table use for layout more explicit and to
> expand the explanations of the issues.
> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
> On 29 January 2014 20:59, Olaf Drümmer < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>> Regarding the use of the word "should" - here is an excerpt from
>> "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels, S. Bradner.
>> > 3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
>> > may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
>> > particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
>> > carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
>> so given there are valid reasons, it can be acceptable - on a normative
>> level - to use a layout table.
>> HTML5 then proceeds - in a normative (and actually absolutely strict - by
>> means of the word MUST) manner - what to do exactly when using a layout
>> table (i.e. use role = "presentation" attribute)
>> I would see the task of the accessibility community in ensuring that
>> content in a layout table is presented - by user agents and AT - in an
>> accessible fashion. Given that such accessibility can technically be
>> achieved I have difficulty seeing why banning layout tables anyway is
>> deemed acceptable.
>> On 29 Jan 2014, at 21:26, Steve Faulkner < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>> > On 29 January 2014 20:00, Olaf Drümmer < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>> >> I actually do dispute that. HTML 5 even tells you how to do layout
>> > patrick is right, tables are for data, that is the semantics they
>> > when the normative advice in the spec is ignored one repair technique
>> is to
>> > remove the semantics with role=presentation.
>> > HTML5 says<
>> > :
>> > "Tables should not be used as layout aids. Historically, many Web
>> > have tables in HTML as a way to control their page layout making it
>> > difficult to extract tabular data from such documents. In particular,
>> > of accessibility tools, like screen readers, are likely to find it very
>> > difficult to navigate pages with tables used for layout. If a table is
>> > be used for layout it must be marked with the attribute
>> > for a user agent to properly represent the table to an assistive
>> > and to properly convey the intent of the author to tools that wish to
>> > extract tabular data from the document."
>> > note the SHOULD NOT in the first sentence is a normative statement (as
>> > the MUST in the third sentence). In other words use of tables for
>> layout is
>> > NOT RECOMMENDED, but the spec acknowledges that tables are misused and
>> > provides advice on a repair mechanism. This advice could probably do
>> > strengthening and expanding.
>> > --
>> > Regards
>> > SteveF
>> > HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
>> > >> > >> > >>
>> >> >> >>