W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Audience Based Validator User Interface (ISSUE-206)

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 19:28:54 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VnMn_7gihMiEUoZ49qU1ZBTZah5C0yLVUbs_GUgkFC3cQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Cc: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Hi Ben,

>Can you give an example of desirable/necessary/inevitable behavior
>that you think would be disallowed by the current requirements but
>allowed by this change?


 I use adobe dreamweaver as it provides a range of tools to aid me in code
editing, it allows me to create HTML5 documents. i assume it cannot be
considered as conforming HTML5 document because I often i create save and
publish non confroming HTML5 documents.

A developer at any point in the document edting lifecycle may want to save
and publish a HTML5 document that is non conforming for various reasons.
A developer may want to inlcude 3rd part scirpted widgets in a HTML5
document, for example they use a DOJO widget which contains custom
attributes.

in any of the above a conforming HTML5 authoring tool would be useless if
it could not emit the documents.

regards
Stevef

On 5 August 2012 18:59, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
<bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I would suggest replacing the current MUST emit conforming HTML5
> documents
> > with 'MUST allow and should encourage authors to produce conforming
> > documents'.
>
> Can you give an example of desirable/necessary/inevitable behavior
> that you think would be disallowed by the current requirements but
> allowed by this change?
>
> > I am aware of this and am not talking about the cases where author
> intent is
> > not known or not discernable. I agree that as much guidance as is
> necessary
> > is provided to authoring tool vendors , but to say "HTML5 authoring tools
> > MUST NOT emit documents that do not conform to HTML5" is taking
> theortical
> > purity to its limits. It is just not practical in any sense to expect any
> > authoring tool to abide by this condition. If I am incorrect in this
> > assumption I am happy to be disabused.
>
> If that quotation were all the spec said, I'd definitely agree, but
> the spec goes on to add all sorts of qualifications (unquoted) that
> lessen the impossibility of that MUST. It's not clear to me what
> precisely you think is insufficient about those qualifications. Can
> you elaborate?
>
> --
> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
>



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Sunday, 5 August 2012 18:30:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 5 August 2012 18:30:05 GMT