WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Q: Table footnotes in Word

for

From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Mar 14, 2015 2:41PM

Bevi, I would isolate the table caption and the table in a section. I would use end notes instead of footnotes. This would make the notes fall immediately below the table while giving you the proper linking between each note and its citation.

This method makes it possible to have footnotes in the body of the document and footnotes in each table without having any confusion about which notes are which.

Although I've never seen the section element mentioned in training on creating accessible documents in Word, it does have semantic value. This is one instance in which that value can be particularly helpful.

Cliff Tyllick

Sent from my iPhone
Although its spellcheck often saves me, all goofs in sent messages are its fault.

> On Mar 14, 2015, at 1:40 PM, Jon Metz < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> I don't agree with it being an accessibility violation. They are *related*
> to the tabular data, so that makes them part of the information you are
> providing. By this very definition, it would be meeting WCAG 2.0 1.3.1,
> because it directly applies to how you are marking up the structure of the
> table.
>
> I do however agree with Sarah that unfortunately Word does a miserable job
> organizing this stuff. Technically they should be in the footer cell, but
> it might not be usable to people because of how badly Word handles it. So
> placing them outside the table in this case might be the best case
> scenario, and having them near the table would *also* be conforming to
> 1.3.1 because having them *inside* the table is "within the presentation"
> but *outside* the table is "conveyed in text".
>
> I think this is one of those situations where you just do what's best for
> the user. This is something one of the really unfortunate realities about
> accessibility. Sometimes you can't please everybody, so you need to figure
> out how to make it usable to the widest possible audience (Take a look at
> the all the problems that iPlayer from BBC is having with the inability to
> make everyone happy).
>
> If I were you, I'd leave them out and then try to get Microsoft to do
> things appropriately so we can make things more accessible for a wider
> audience. But however you do it it's still within the scope of 1.3.1 based
> on my interpretation of it.
>
> My two cents.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Ryan E. Benson < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
>> I concur
>>
>> --
>> Ryan E. Benson
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Jonathan Avila <
>> <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> We're under the impression that they should be within the <Table> tag,
>>> in a row at the bottom. Essentially in a footer row.
>>>
>>> I would consider placing footnotes in a table a accessibility violation
>> as
>>> that information isn't tabular data. I believe the idea of the tfoot
>>> element was for column summaries -- not other data that applies to the
>>> table as a whole.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jonathan Avila
>>> Chief Accessibility Officer
>>> SSB BART Group
>>> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>>
>>> 703-637-8957 (o)
>>> Follow us: Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Blog | Newsletter
>>>
>>>
>>>