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

Re: Warnings for conforming features in a validator

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:56:37 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VmFTj0BSNzKSrWdmvJh+Ymz2Kn9t8ez2tP9HCOQwrQfBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Winnberg <peter.winnberg@gmail.com>
Cc: W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
hi peter,

here is the source code for the validator listing the conforming features
that emit a warning;
https://bitbucket.org/validator/syntax/src/tip/non-schema/java/src/org/whattf/checker/UnsupportedFeatureChecker.java

you wrote:
"If it is conforming then we want to encourage people to use it and I think
a
warning would do the exact opposite."

Just because something is conforming it does not necessarily follow that
people should be encouraged to use it.
Developers should be encouraged to use features that are either robustly
supported or degrade gracefully.

regards
Stevef



On 12 March 2012 16:43, Peter Winnberg <peter.winnberg@gmail.com> wrote:

> This is a reply to Steve Faulknerís message about a warning for the
> longdesc attribute in the validator [1]. I apologize for not replying
> directly to that message, but Iím not subscribed to public-html-a11y
> or wai-xtech at the moment.
>
> If the longdesc attribute becomes conforming in HTML5 again then I
> donít think this generate a warning in the validator. If it is
> conforming then we want to encourage people to use it and I think a
> warning would do the exact opposite. This is at least the way that
> warnings have been used in the validator in the past, discourage use
> of deprecated features and encourage people to move on to their
> replacements (e.g., move from font elements to CSS).
>
> How to handle incomplete/incorrect user agent implementations of
> features was handled as advice in the WCAG [2] (not sure about now
> though) and not as warnings in the validator. And because of that
> there was a clear separation between features that developers should
> move away from and features that currently have implementation issues.
>
> But what are the criteria for getting a warning in the validator in
> HTML5? There needs to be some consistency here so that it doesnít seem
> like some features are treated differently than others. If the
> longdesc becomes conforming and generates a warning in the validator,
> should for example all pages that use the title attribute also get
> warnings? That attribute also have implementation issues (in some
> cases). Or should everyone that uses the canvas element get a warning,
> that element obviously has some big issues related to accessibility
> that still needs to be worked out and then have those changes
> implemented.
>
> But like I indicated above, in my opinion it is better if these issues
> are kept separate from warnings so that developers donít start to move
> away from features that maybe just for a short time have
> implementation issues.
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Mar/0077.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/wai-pageauth.html#until-user-agents
>



-- 
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 Monday, 12 March 2012 16:57:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:56 GMT