WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: complex layout tables

for

From: Steve Faulkner
Date: Jan 30, 2014 3:02AM

I have also mailed the HTML WG
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2014Jan/0155.html


--

Regards

SteveF
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
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24447
>
> to make the advice against table use for layout more explicit and to
> expand the explanations of the issues.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> 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
>> [RFC2119].
>> "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels, S. Bradner.
>> IETF""
>>
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>> Olaf
>>
>>
>>
>> On 29 Jan 2014, at 21:26, Steve Faulkner < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > 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
>> tables:
>> >
>> >
>> > patrick is right, tables are for data, that is the semantics they
>> convey,
>> > when the normative advice in the spec is ignored one repair technique
>> is to
>> > remove the semantics with role=presentation.
>> > HTML5 says<
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
>> >
>> > :
>> >
>> > "Tables should not be used as layout aids. Historically, many Web
>> authors
>> > have tables in HTML as a way to control their page layout making it
>> > difficult to extract tabular data from such documents. In particular,
>> users
>> > 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
>> to
>> > be used for layout it must be marked with the attribute
>> role="presentation"
>> > for a user agent to properly represent the table to an assistive
>> technology
>> > 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
>> is
>> > 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
>> with
>> > strengthening and expanding.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > SteveF
>> > HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>;
>> > >> > >> > >>
>> >> >> >>
>
>