aloha!

in order to use the table located at:

http://www.w3.org/QA/2008/05/syntax_for_aria_costbenefit_an.html#table

it was first necessary for me to add:

  1. a summary

  2. headers/id associations

  3. scope associations

  4. use of WCAG2 Technique C7 to provide contextual information to 
     screen-readers and non-CSS-capable browsers for the footnote 
     links

  5. the placement of the "notes" on the table into a TFOOT

this provides the basic level of support so that i, as a totally blind
user, can use my assistive technology to make sense of the data presented
in a tabular form...  i have attached the "accessified" table to this 
post. (note: it validates as XHTML 1.0 Strict according to the W3C 
validator)

i'm quite disappointed that the Q&A weblog (and other "official" W3C 
resources that are generated via templates) do NOT conform to WCAG 1.0; 
tables MUST include, AT THE VERY LEAST:

  1. a summary

  2. headers/id associations

  3. use of the scope attribute

so that one does not need to rely on one's sense of sight and ability to 
visually associate data with its labels...

this isn't just nit-picking; it is an important consideration -- if we 
are to have others do as the W3C says, then it is IMPERATIVE that W3C 
resources be as WCAG-compliant as possible...  there are no ifs, ands,
or buts about it -- all W3C resources should apply WCAG techniques to
ensure the maximum usability and accessibility of W3C materials

thank you,
gregory j. rosmaita
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, 
not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of 
plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
                         -- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
-------------------------------------------------------------------
          Gregory J. Rosmaita, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
UBATS - United Blind Advocates for Talking Signs: http://ubats.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Title: Syntax for ARIA: Cost-benefit Analysis (Accessified Table)

Syntax for ARIA: Cost-benefit Analysis (Accessified Table)

NOTE: This is an excerpt from the Q&A Web Log entry, Syntax for ARIA: Cost-benefit Analysis (Henry Thompson)

Passive
support
HTML 4.01 XHTML
(as if HTML) Note 0
XHTML
(as XML)
SVG
Notes:
0  This column applies to the IE family, and to other browsers whenever treating XHTML as HTML
1  Firefox 2.0.0.14, IE7 + Adobe 3.03 SVG plugin
2  All browsers which treat XHTML as XML
3  Firefox 2.0.0.14 (unable to test IE+plugin so far)
4  Except IE family
5  If attribute selectors supported at all, i.e. not IE5, IE6

It should be noted that some of the entries above disagree with assertions made in the past about browser behaviour. At least some of those assertions were based on flawed test materials -- see the discussion of experiments 1 and 2 in my testing report for details on the information summarised above.

Allowed
at all
colon: Yes, by 'should ignore' advice
dash: Yes, by 'should ignore' advice
colon: Yes, by 'should ignore' advice
dash: Yes, by 'should ignore' advice
colon: Yes, by 'must ignore' rule
dash: Yes, by 'must ignore' rule
colon: Yes, by 'must ignore' rule
dash: In principle,no
in practice Note 1, yes
Available
via DOM
colon: Yes, via GetAttribute
dash: Yes, via GetAttribute
colon: Yes, via GetAttribute
dash: Yes, via GetAttribute
colon: Yes Note 2, via GetAttributeNS and GetAttribute
dash: Yes Note 2, via GetAttribute
colon: Yes Note 3, via GetAttributeNS and GetAttribute
dash: Yes Note 3, via GetAttribute
Matches
CSS selector
colon: Yes Note 4, using [aria\:attr]
dash: Yes Note 5
colon: Yes Note 4, using [aria\:attr]
dash: Yes Note 5
colon: Yes, using [aria|attr]
dash: Yes Note 5
colon: No
dash: No

Reply via email to