WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: PDF Table column headers and scope attribute

for

From: Laura Roberts
Date: Mar 16, 2023 9:07AM

I personally would still set scope.
In JAWS there's a command to say the contents of the cell. If the scope
isn't set, then JAWS will not read the header.
For example, without scope set, JAWS will just say the row and column
numbers. That doesn't tell the user anything useful.
With the scope set, JAWS will say the column header (of that cell) followed
by the row header (if scope is set for it) and then the cell contents...and
then the user knows exactly where they are without having to move around
the table.
I don't really care what the Matterhorn protocols say about this, only the
end user experience.


On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:01 AM Alan Zaitchik < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> I’ve told PDF developers for years that data table column header TH cells
> require scope set to “column” (unless IDs and the headers array are used to
> create associations). This advice was based on Matterhorn 15-003. I also
> seem to recall the old PAC-3 flagging it as a failure if scope isn’t
> specified, although my memory might be wrong there.
> What I’m now finding, however, is that for simple (regular) tables even
> when scope is not specified JAWS and NVDA consistently and correctly read
> the table headers; they correctly figure out that the TH cells have a
> column scope. Not only that, PAC 2021 and Acrobat A11y Checker don’t report
> a failure. (Haven’t yet checked with CommonLook or Crawford tools or
> others.) SO I’m wondering if this requirement makes a difference for these
> simple cases and whether it’s even a formal PDF/UA requirement!
> My questions are:
> 1. Can anyone point to a “significant AT product and PDF reader
> combination“ that does not implicitly assign correct scope when it is not
> explicitly coded?
> 2. Is the absence of the scoped attribute (when IDs and Header array
> mechanism is not used) a “formal failure” of PDF/UA accessibility? What is
> the normative status of the Matterhorn protocol?
> 3. Even if this is deemed a failure, might the priority of fixing this
> failure anyway be considered very low given my observations about JAWS and
> NVDA (and PAC 2021) not caring? Note again that I am NOT talking about
> complex tables, just simple regular tables on a single PDF page, no merged
> cells with colspan>1 or rowspan>1, etc., etc.
>
> All feedback welcome!
>
> A
> > On Mar 9, 2023, at 14:00, <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
> >
> > Send WebAIM-Forum mailing list submissions to
> > <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://list.webaim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webaim-forum
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of WebAIM-Forum digest..."
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Incorrect reading behaviour by JAWS and NVDA for the same PPT
> > slide. (Nibin Mathew (SO/OPM33-IN))
> > 2. Re: Incorrect reading behaviour by JAWS and NVDA for the same
> > PPT slide. (David Farough)
> > <mime-attachment>
> > <mime-attachment>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >


--
Best regards,
Laura Roberts
413-588-8422