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

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

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 10:52:45 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOavpvfgxMLVZnVboG0w+Q=e+yQCg=Z=XWOdHzyjHtzXPOsS-w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Hi Henri,

Henri Sivonen wrote
> when invoked the way the markup generator developers expect the
> people who evaluate quality the generators to invoke the validator*
> (i.e. with defalut settings).

Then this is an education problem not a spec problem. The validator
could help in this effort if we let it. Hiding results fosters
ignorance.

> This scenario has been stated again and again ever since 2007. It's
> pretty frustrating that the scenario is still being misunderstood.

I am sorry that you are frustrated Henri.

> This won't work,

How do we know it won't work unless we try it?

> because people who evaluate the quality of markup
> generators can[not] be trusted to do so only in the "Generator
> Developers"  mode. It doesn't matter if running a validator with the
> default setting on the output of a generator is the wrong way to
> evaluate the quality of the generator.

What do you base this on? Do you have evidence that your customers are
untrustworthy?

Best Regards,
Laura

-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 15:53:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 7 August 2012 15:53:14 GMT