I'm not disagreeing with where you're coming from, Iris.
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS/#gl-table-markup
states "5.3 Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when
linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an
alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version)." This has a
link to
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS/wcag10-tech.html#def-linearized-t
able
"A table rendering process where the contents of the cells become a series
of paragraphs (e.g., down the page) one after another. The paragraphs will
occur in the same order as the cells are defined in the document source.
Cells should make sense when read in order and should include structural
elements (that create paragraphs, headings, lists, etc.) so the page makes
sense after linearization."
The point I was trying to make (building on Sebastian's) was that tables
are a visual representation of data structured in a particular way. If the
data can be linearised, then that this is a presentational device is
self-evident. Tabulation is (re)presentation. It is distinct from the
inter-relationships between the data. These are what a screenreader would
be trying to get at.
Duncan
===================================================
Duncan Branley [log in to unmask]
Applications Officer, Information Services
Goldsmiths' College, University of London
New Cross, LONDON SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 (0)20 7919 7708 Fax: +44 (0)20 7919 7556
===================================================
|