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.
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.
Apparently forms inside tables are bad for screenreader users because they have to constantly switch between "forms mode" and "tables mode" to navigate them.
> 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.
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.
