> Using "class" may not be perfect but it will be used very infrequently (I
> guess) and defining this CSS class should not cause much hindrance to the
> author.


The idea sounds great, but I rather suggest a 'type' attribute for tables
(which really expresses the way it is used), like

   <table type="layout" />

thus implying e.g. an optional 'data' value. This is obviously no CSS
matter, and so there is no need for use of the class attribute, and the proposed
type attribute would clearly make a difference between tables used either for
layout or data -- solving an important Accessibility problem.

By the way, if this attribute would be introduced you could pass on caption
or th elements (in layout tables), according to a real simplification (I am
no friend of these elements, either).


Regards,
 Jens.



> 
> >Proposal: CLASS="layout"
> >
> 
> I like the idea of having a method for the author to explicitly state the
> table purpose. They can use this method to create a table that has non
> standard properties but will still be detected by user agents and
> accessibility checking tools. This is an unusual situation but allows the
> user maximum flexibility.
> 
> Using "class" may not be perfect but it will be used very infrequently (I
> guess) and defining this CSS class should not cause much hindrance to the
> author.
> 
> Chris
> 


-- 
Jens Meiert

Steubenstr. 28
D-26123 Oldenburg

Mobil +49 (0)175 78 4146 5
Telefon +49 (0)441 99 86 147
Telefax +49 (0)89 1488 2325 91

Mail <jens@meiert.com>
Internet <http://meiert.com >