|
| minthreadsleft = 4
}}
== Row headers when table contains only two columns ==
This issue has bugged me for ages and I'd like some guidance, although I confess I'm not at all familiar with some of the terminology involved in table creation.
On a few album articles, I've seen editors reformatting a charts table so that, where previously the two columns (national chart/compiler; peak position) both appeared in what I'd describe as a shade of light grey or off-white, now the left-hand column is rendered with a dark grey background, just like the column headers. In my opinion, this treatment looks over the top and something of an eyesore, because – since the chart names take up far more width than a one-, two- or three-digit chart position – the vast majority of the table becomes a mass of heavy, dark grey.
As an example, the [[Rubber Soul]] article looked [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rubber_Soul&oldid=1046980802#Charts like this] until recently; it now looks [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rubber_Soul&oldid=1048879685#Charts like this]. I think the first example is perfectly clear and easy on the eye. Also, it's not as if tables such as reviewer ratings boxes get the same heavy treatment, eg at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rubber_Soul&oldid=1046980802#Retrospective_assessment Rubber Soul again]. And I see tables where there are several more rows (in which case, you'd think the row header aspect was far more important) but all are set with the lighter, off-white background: eg [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Summer_Olympics_medal_table#Medal_table 2016 Olympics medal table], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Summer_Olympics#Bidding_process 2012 Olympics host city election]. (In addition, I've come across pages like [[Help:Sortable tables]] where [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Sortable_tables#Example none of the examples] have this treatment either._
So my question is, is it possible/permissible to still set these two-column charts tables without the heavy background? I guess it's an issue to do with "plainrowheaders"(?), the term used by an editor to explain a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=All_Things_Must_Pass&diff=1038588755&oldid=1038586559 similar change in another album article]. They cited [[MOS:ACCESS]], although I have to say I couldn't find any reference to plainrowheaders on that MOS page – which is why I've ended up here, in fact. Thanks, [[User:JG66|JG66]] ([[User talk:JG66|talk]]) 01:57, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
:A big problem is that blind people using screen readers can't really know just how annoying a grey background is. They can't see it.
:Also, another problem is that some editors, especially some of those that camp out on this talk page, are trying to put scope tags on all header and column rows, even though almost no other websites do. Because other websites look at the actual [[Web Content Accessibility Guidelines]] at the source, and not as they are interpreted by some people on Wikipedia. --[[User:Timeshifter|'''Timeshifter''']] ([[User talk:Timeshifter|talk]]) 02:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
::Thank you for the speedy reply but ... um, I don't know if your opening paragraph is a dig at my complaint or ...? Sorry, could just be the way I'm reading it. I'm an optimist – I'll take it that it isn't a dig(!)
::I fully appreciate the importance of accessibility to all. So I suppose the question is whether ensuring the best access for screen readers (via "wikitable sortable", "plainrowheaders"?) necessarily has to dictate how that process or code is visually rendered in a table. As mentioned, this approach hardly seems consistent – eg, how are screen readers coping with the two-column reviewer ratings box?
::Again, I emphasise that I'm completely ignorant about table formatting. I'm sure that tests the patience of regulars here, but I would like to get to the bottom of it if possible. [[MOS:CHARTS]] says "The chart positions should be organized into one table, and the table should be formatted using <code>class="wikitable sortable"</code>." Well, that was already in place before the recent changes at one or two album articles I watch; it seems to have been the introduction of these plainrowheaders that creates the darker grey background. [[User:JG66|JG66]] ([[User talk:JG66|talk]]) 03:25, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
:::{{u|JG66}}. No dig intended. I deleted my first answer. Here is my second answer. See:
:::'''[https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/H63.html H63: Using the scope attribute to associate header cells and data cells in data tables | Techniques for WCAG 2.0].''' It says:
:::"Note: For simple tables that have the headers in the first row or column then it is sufficient to simply use the TH elements without scope."
:::See: '''[https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/tables Tables Concepts • Tables • WAI Web Accessibility Tutorials].''' It says:
:::"Tables with one header for rows or columns: For tables with content that is easy to distinguish, mark up header cells with <nowiki><th></nowiki> and data cells with <nowiki><td></nowiki> elements."
:::But when you go to the fine print it says "For tables with unclear header directions, define the direction of each header by setting the scope attribute to col or row."
:::I think most tables on Wikipedia do not have unclear header directions. The column headers are on the top. The row headers are on the left.
:::'''[https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H51.html H51: Using table markup to present tabular information | Techniques for WCAG 2.0].''' "Simple tables generally have only one level of headers for columns and/or one level of headers on the rows." Example 1 is definitive as far as I am concerned. There is no requirement for scopes on such simple tables.
:::I did some tests awhile back that confirmed this:
:::[[Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial#Comparing tables with and without scope=col and scope=row]]. Please ignore the heated tone of some of the discussion. I apologize for my part in the heated tone.
:::Getting to your questions. I don't see the need for designating row headers in the 2 column table examples you gave. Screen readers will read the column header for each data cell. It will be obvious to the user what the relationship is between the the 2 cells in each row, even without row headers. And scopes are total overkill in that example.
:::--[[User:Timeshifter|'''Timeshifter''']] ([[User talk:Timeshifter|talk]]) 10:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
::::Thanks, {{u|Timeshifter}}. You've given me a fair bit of homework, and I can't promise I'll jump on it immediately ... As I've said, I'm hopeless with table terminology ("scope"?).
::::I'm all for ensuring good accessibility for screen readers, but I'm confused as to why a simple, two-column table has to be rendered in the current way. And/or: why it is that the screen-reader-friendly input needs to even register visually when one reads the page "normally". (Why do we need to ''see'' what that software handles differently?) As I've said, my concern is with the two-column tables for record charts. Not only is it so simple in presentation that one questions whether info in the left-hand column really is a row header, but the table ends up such an eyesore, because the darkened-out LH column is usually far wider than the RH column, which contains just a single or double digit.
::::Anyway, don't feel the need to reply to that. I obviously need to do some reading. [[User:JG66|JG66]] ([[User talk:JG66|talk]]) 15:57, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
:::::{{u|JG66}}. I agree. I don't see the need for the gray background of the row headers. Or the bold font. It is obvious what are row headers in most tables when the row headers are on the left side of the table. And screen readers only need the scopes or <nowiki><th></nowiki>.
:::::I think a gray background with black text is not enough contrast. Especially when the gray is too dark as in Wikipedia tables. And I keep my monitor brightness turned down. As recommended by many eye doctors. That makes the contrast even less.
:::::It is annoying. So it would be nice to have truly plain row headers with a white background and a regular (non-bold) font. Then people would be more likely to add scopes for row headers. At least for more complex tables. Scopes are not needed on simple tables. --[[User:Timeshifter|'''Timeshifter''']] ([[User talk:Timeshifter|talk]]) 02:25, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
== Rowgroups and plainrowheaders ==
| 