RE: User agent support of SUMMARY attribute in tables

iris <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.org.w3c.accessibility.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
--- "Jukka K. Korpela" <[email protected]> wrote:
> For layout tables, we might take the pragmatic
> approach that omitting
> summary attributes is the simplest way and won't
> cause protests except
> from checkers. 

i wish it was that easy and normally i would only care
about making a website truly accessible no matter what
the automated checkers say.  

but then my boss, who hired me as an accessibility
expert, says, why doesn't our site pass the bobby
test?  i might spend a few minutes trying to explain
my decisions to him and might even succeed.  but how
do i defend myself against a publicly available report
on the accessibility of higher education project
websites where one of my sites is listed as failing
bobby.

i have applied numerous (what i consider) hacks to
please bobby just so that my sites *look* accessible
to outsiders. 

i'm not blaming bobby and its makers, they wanted to
supply a useful tool to web designers and that's what
they did.  it is not a tool for people who have no
understanding of the details and only look for the
'bobby approved' or 'repair needed' graphic.

iris



=====
*******************************
omnia mea mecum porto

<http://www.jarmin.com/>
<http://www.demos.ac.uk/>
*******************************

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.