3 ms·

Dude hasn't heard of definition lists for forms? They offer far better screen reader flow for disabled users than tables.

olavk 18y ago
How do definition lists offer a better reader flow?
- ajross 18y ago
  They don't. A table row has exactly the same recursive structure as a definition list, and will be treated the same way by a screenreader. It's kinda sad how many people like to play the "accessibility card" without any actual understanding of how those technologies work. What screenreaders do have trouble with, however, is static layouts where the "meaningful" content is buried six levels deep, and often at the end of the logical document, just to make room for a bunch of navigation aids and advertisements. That, however, isn't a reason not to use tables where they help. Also, note that with just a tiny amount of javascript it's possible to come up with a document that displays in a nice table layout and has a nice logical structure for screenreaders. It just requires that you get beyond the pedantry of the table.
  - simonw 18y ago
    Apparently forms inside tables are bad for screenreader users because they have to constantly switch between "forms mode" and "tables mode" to navigate them.
    - feverishaaron 18y ago
      Bingo! Tables should be used for tabular data.
      - wvenable 18y ago
        Forms are tabular data -- headers on side, data on the other. Screen readers should have long adapted to that scenario.
        marcelvr 18y ago
        > Forms are tabular data -- headers on side, data on the other. For very simple form designs, sure. But that idea breaks down when you have a more sophisticated form and need to consider horizontal "flow" between fields. Tables are hammers, but not all forms are nails.
  - irrelative 18y ago
    Thank you for pointing these out. You're absolutely correct -- I'm not sure how the "accessibility card" could still be played without better understanding, but it seems to stick around. I challenge the hackers here to find a way to teach this to the CSS diehards. I often wonder why the accessibility of CSS based layouts is often preached by the same people who make Flash sites.
  - olavk 18y ago
    Arguments about screen-readers seem to be mostly based on superstition or wishful thinking. Some seem to believe that screen readers are actually the fabled and elusive semantic browser which understands the subtle semantic differences between UL, OL and DL, but on the other hand is stupid enough to just crash upon encountering a TABLE without a TH. This might be the case, but it would be really interesting to hear something about it from someone who actually have real-world experience with them.

olavk 18y ago

How do definition lists offer a better reader flow?

ajross 18y ago
They don't. A table row has exactly the same recursive structure as a definition list, and will be treated the same way by a screenreader. It's kinda sad how many people like to play the "accessibility card" without any actual understanding of how those technologies work. What screenreaders do have trouble with, however, is static layouts where the "meaningful" content is buried six levels deep, and often at the end of the logical document, just to make room for a bunch of navigation aids and advertisements. That, however, isn't a reason not to use tables where they help. Also, note that with just a tiny amount of javascript it's possible to come up with a document that displays in a nice table layout and has a nice logical structure for screenreaders. It just requires that you get beyond the pedantry of the table.
- simonw 18y ago
  Apparently forms inside tables are bad for screenreader users because they have to constantly switch between "forms mode" and "tables mode" to navigate them.
  - feverishaaron 18y ago
    Bingo! Tables should be used for tabular data.
    - wvenable 18y ago
      Forms are tabular data -- headers on side, data on the other. Screen readers should have long adapted to that scenario.
      - marcelvr 18y ago
        > Forms are tabular data -- headers on side, data on the other. For very simple form designs, sure. But that idea breaks down when you have a more sophisticated form and need to consider horizontal "flow" between fields. Tables are hammers, but not all forms are nails.
- irrelative 18y ago
  Thank you for pointing these out. You're absolutely correct -- I'm not sure how the "accessibility card" could still be played without better understanding, but it seems to stick around. I challenge the hackers here to find a way to teach this to the CSS diehards. I often wonder why the accessibility of CSS based layouts is often preached by the same people who make Flash sites.
- olavk 18y ago
  Arguments about screen-readers seem to be mostly based on superstition or wishful thinking. Some seem to believe that screen readers are actually the fabled and elusive semantic browser which understands the subtle semantic differences between UL, OL and DL, but on the other hand is stupid enough to just crash upon encountering a TABLE without a TH. This might be the case, but it would be really interesting to hear something about it from someone who actually have real-world experience with them.