fixes 1822 - table irregular headers example 2 code doesn't match cod…

[becka11y]

…e on main page
Resolves #1822
table irregular headers example 2 code doesn't match code on main page

Example #2 in the Tables > Irregular Headers page contains a link to the full code. This code appears to be just the snippet and the code in the main tutorial page is the full code rather than vice versa. Rather than modify/shorten the existing "snippet" on the main page and cause more confusion, I updated the example code to match this full code. The full example code link now contains the correct, full code.

I also updated the changelog since this would affect anyone who was using the example code.

@netlify /tables/irregular/

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for wai-website ready!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	87b097d
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/wai-website/deploys/69cebeb447ebd5000895489d
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1943--wai-website.netlify.app/tables/irregular/
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[remibetin]

Thanks @becka11y.

This code appears to be just the snippet

It also does not apply the tutorial guidance regarding the use <thead>, <tbody>, and <tfoot> elements.

I've found a 2014 draft of the tutorial in CVS with this code. When the <thead> <tbody> and <tfoot> guidance was added, the "code snippet" was updated, but the full example page was not. So, I assume it was just an oversight at the time.

the code in the main tutorial page is the full code

Considering this, I'm not sure a full example code page is needed. How about removing the page and the "Full code example" link?

[becka11y]

@remibetin I'm fine with removing the full code link, but I was concerned about having a broken link in case anyone had referenced that page. I also wonder about the advice to include elements that have empty content (I'm old school when memory and bandwidth was limited; I avoid adding extra code ;). In this case, that would be the . The HTML spec does allow this. But, from an accessibility perspective, I don't see this added structure making a difference for accessibility. It seems that the thead, tbody, and tfoot provide structural relevance and are used for styling but they make no difference for screen reader announcement. The proper use of is most important for screen reader navigation of tables. The rows within are just announced as additional rows, the screen readers don't provide any announcement of the footer grouping and I didn't find any mechanisms to navigate quickly through table structure by head, body, and foot via screen readers.
But,since an empty is allowed. I can add that into the code to this example if you want. Then at least we are following the advice on the page. Let me know if you want to remove the link to the "full" example.