Closed emylonas closed 6 years ago
assigned to Kevin for feedback
It appears that there are two back-to-back tables: one containing values for front and back matter, and the second containing values for the body. Each of these tables is arranged in two pseudo-columns—that is, the column headers are repeated twice in each table, with a blank column in between. This was apparently done to use more of the horizontal space so users don't have to scroll as far.
However, I think this is bad practice to code the tables this way. A user with a screen-reader is going to be confused about whether things in the same row are related. In fact, someone without a screen reader, such as myself, was also confused about whether values in the same row are somehow related.
So I think both tables should be recoded so that there's only ever one attribute value per line. I suggest moving the attribute values for back matter after the attribute values for the body.
In addition, if there are any types of sections, such as an afterword or addendum, that haven't been addressed in the table, I think we should add them.
close once guidelines have been remade and checked
We verified and then made a few more tweaks.
In section 3.6, Textual Divisions http://paramedic.wwp.neu.edu/~syd/temp/BPTL/2018-05-17T08/main-driver.html#index.xml-body.1_div.3_div.6 , there is one fewer element in the list on the right (back matter) than there is on the left (front matter). The table has a blank and looks funny.
We could a)move the bottom 4 values up and close up the blank. b) add a new div type, for ex.
afterword
oraddendum
and move the top 4 values down by one.Question: Should we add a value to balance the table? if so, which value?