Edit comment LC-2462 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Previous: LC-2429 Next: LC-2463

Comment LC-2462: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
Under Intent it states:
â€œit may be most appropriate to duplicate some information (for instance, in an HTML table, providing the summary both in the paragraph before the table
and in the summary attribute of the table itself).â€
Comment: Not sure why summary attribute needs to be present if it duplicates text in para above.
This is giving fodder to those who wish to banish the summary attribute.
If this duplication is alright, why then having alt that is identical to anchor text in image link not alright?

Response from WG:
With the table, the text in the paragraph above is not programmatically associated with the table (except if using WAI-ARIA). The summary is linked. With your second example, both texts are programmatically associated to the link.

Response from Commenter:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2011Mar/0020.html

Thanks for the response.
Sorry, I disagree. A sighted user can only associate the data table with some explanatory text in a paragraph on the page by reference to a sentence in the text that refers to the table like, "In the accompanying table ..." or "Table-1 refers to ...".
Programmatic association does not help the sighted user. A screen reader user too will be in the same position and he must not have to access this content twice - once through table's summary attribute. Programmatic association is not required here. Programmatic association / markup is required to expose structure / relationships that may not be otherwise quickly or easily apparent to assistive technology users.
In fact it is misuse or misapplication of table summary if it duplicates page-text. The summary is meant to assist non-sighted users understand table structure of complex tables or salient / key data revealed by the table which is evident to sighted users.; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: I think in light of WAI-ARIA we can update two paragraphs that have examples... they would actually meet his request and not compromise the principle, while still allowing redundancy... Sept 22 draft: Proposed Response: In light of WAI-ARIA developements, we have updated to paragraph to include programmatically associating the visual text with the table, and discouraging redundancy, while not forbidding it for many reasons including legacy content. We have updated the paragraph as follows: "Some technologies do not provide a means to programmatically determine some types of information and relationships. In that case there should be a text description of the information and relationships. For instance, "all required fields are marked with an asterisk (*)". Where possible WAI-ARIA should be used to programmatically associate the text. In some legacy situations, or where WAI-ARIA is not available, it is acceptable to have the text description near the information it is describing (when the page is linearized), such as in the parent element or in the adjacent element. There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call about what information should appear in text and when text should be directly associated. For instance, in an HTML table, there are some situations when the Summary attribute should be used to give an explanation to screen reader users which is not available to a sighted user. In other situations the text summary should appear in a paragraph before the Table so that all can see it, and it would be associated using aria-describedby. In rare situations redundancy can be used, where information appears programmatically, and in separate text. However, this can be "chatty" for screen reader users, and in light of the increasing support for WAI ARIA, is not usually necessary. Wherever possible it is necessary for the information to be programmatically determined rather than providing a text description before encountering the table." See Michael's comments at http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20110922misc/results#x2462 10/6/11 Response: Thank you for your comment. Generally speaking, programmatic association is required when possible. On the other hand, context generated by reading order proximity can also be taken into consideration. In the case of the table summary example at hand, it seems possible that a screen reader user would have difficulty associating a table with a preceding paragraph (assuming it is not a table caption), depending on the actual reading order proximity and other factors. It would therefore seem prudent to repeat at least some of the more essential information contained in that paragraph. We have therefore decided to change the text in question to: "and it may be appropriate to duplicate some information (for instance, in an HTML table, providing a summary attribute with a concise description of essential information contained in the paragraph before the table)..." @@proposed resolution: Change text to: "and it may be appropriate to duplicate some information (for instance, in an HTML table, providing a summary attribute with a concise description of essential information contained in the paragraph before the table)..."; Resolution: We have removed the sentence that discusses duplicating information, so that this paragraph now reads: [DONE] There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call about what information should appear in text and what would need to be directly associated. However, wherever possible it is necessary for the information to be programmatically determined rather than providing a text description before encountering the table.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)