W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Non-conformance by W3C members

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 20:22:05 -0400
Message-Id: <a05111b11b99da3765e67@[24.201.26.36]>
To: public-evangelist <public-evangelist@w3.org>

At 18:09 -0500 2002-09-05, Brant Langer Gurganus wrote:
>It appears that nearly 75% of W3C members are not following the very 
>guidelines they help create.
>
>http://rss.com.com/2100-1023-956778.html?type=pt&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=news

It's an interesting indicator that I hope Marko will run as often as 
possible. I know that he will do it every 6 months.

The home page validation is an indicator but a loosely one, because 
imagine members start to worry about the validity of their home page, 
they will achieve a better press coverage... but it will not mean 
that the rest of the Web site is valid or all Web sites that a 
compagny has in charge.

For example, it would be good to define a relative scale of validity 
for a whole website.

proportion of
valid pages
-----------------------------
<50%	  BAD
50%-70%	  you're on the good way
70%-90%   good
90%-100%  Great!!! you have a valid website.

After the same time we "evangelize" for validity, we have also to 
evangelize for the correct semantic use of tags and the accessibility.

for example
You can make a valid document, which is completely incorrect for the 
semantic, like using a "blockquote" element to indent un text and not 
for a citation.

So we have work.

PS: When I come back from holidays, I will update the document 
Web-Quality with ideas that have been sent.
If people feel that I have missed bits, examples, or they would like 
to see more things in it. Please send your comments here.

-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 20:22:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 00:13:21 GMT