Inline editing in tables is one of those design challenges that sounds simple—until you try to make it accessible. In episode #5 of Accessibility@Pega, we explore the nuanced world of editable tables, where user expectations, business needs, and accessibility standards collide.
Joining the conversation are Chris LaChance, Senior UX Designer, and Megha Patangi, Senior Accessibility Specialist. Together, they unpack the evolution of our approach to inline editing, the real-world pressures that shaped it, and the accessibility hurdles we’ve had to overcome along the way.
Why editable tables?
The demand for editable tables isn’t new. Business users have long gravitated toward interfaces that mimic the familiarity and efficiency of spreadsheets. Whether it’s managing timecards, updating employee records, or tracking expenses, tables offer a compact, data-dense format that feels intuitive—especially for power users.
But as Chris points out, what’s intuitive for some can be a nightmare for others. Embedding form fields into tables introduces a host of usability and accessibility challenges, particularly for users who rely on screen readers or keyboard navigation. And yet, the need persists. So how do we meet it without compromising on inclusion?
Standards vs. reality
Megha offers a thoughtful breakdown of how accessibility standards like WCAG and the ARIA Authoring Practices Guide (APG) address (or don’t address) this issue. While WCAG provides high-level principles—keyboard operability, semantic relationships, screen reader compatibility—it doesn’t offer specific guidance for complex table interactions. APG goes a step further with examples, but even its most advanced patterns fall short of real-world complexity.
This gap between standards and implementation is where design teams often find themselves improvising. And that’s exactly what this episode explores: the messy, iterative process of building something that works for everyone, even when the rulebook runs out.
Usability meets accessibility
One of the most compelling parts of the discussion is the exploration of usability pitfalls. Chris describes how editable tables can create “keyboard traps,” where users get stuck inside a cell with no clear way to navigate out. Megha highlights how different screen readers interpret the same table in wildly different ways, making consistent behavior difficult to achieve.
The team also touches on the importance of context—how users need to understand not just what they’re editing, but where they are in the table, what the input relates to, and what’s expected of them. Without clear cues, both visual and auditory, even the most well-intentioned design can become a barrier.
A new navigation model
To address these challenges, the team developed a new navigation pattern that blends grid and form behaviors. Inspired by hints in the APG, this model allows users to “break out” of grid mode and navigate through form fields using the tab key—just like they would in a traditional form. It’s a subtle shift, but one that dramatically improves flow and reduces cognitive load.
Of course, this approach requires clear instructions. Users need to know when they’ve entered or exited grid mode, what keys to use, and what to expect. But as internal testing showed, once users understood the model, they found it intuitive and efficient. This functionality will be available in the Infinity '25 Constellation release.
Looking ahead
This episode is a candid look at the challenges of designing for complexity without sacrificing accessibility. It’s a reminder that standards are a starting point, not a finish line—and that real progress often comes from listening, testing, and iterating.
If you’re grappling with similar design dilemmas or just curious about how we’re evolving our practices, this episode is for you. Tune in to hear how our team is rethinking table interactions—and what’s next on the horizon.
🎧 Listen to the full episode of Accessibility@Pega podcast #5 to hear the full conversation and insights from Chris and Megha.