W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2007

Re: [W3C docs] We should teach by example.

From: gonchuki <gonchuki@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 19:25:03 +0200
Message-ID: <8320a9390707061025y27a1e53evbbb50d4db3dd1a1b@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Josh Sled" <jsled@asynchronous.org>

On 7/6/07, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>
> I'm intrigued by the claim that source formatting contributes
> to accessibility. I'm not at all persuaded; I would have to
> see considerably more evidence. Josh Sled's reply is a request
> for that evidence. I'm interested to see the discussion continue,
> and I think it's a reasonable use of group email bandwidth.
>
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
>
>

what I mean with accessibility on this issue is that we must ensure
that the source code is viewable and understandable to any disabled
person, be it that she has low vision or focus/attention disorders. We
must assume that *they are* also authors, and they will surely look at
W3C docs source for a quick reference on how things should be done...
heck, may be they could even be translators like Alejandro and me, I
guess there's no more requirement to be a translator than to fully
know the language you are using.
In a nutshell, that was my main reason to send this to public-html and
not other list.

I agree with Robert Burns in that XML-like syntax is easier to read,
human readability of the code is a must if we are to encourage
standards compliance, as that generally requires authors to go
manually checking the code.

regards,
Gonzalo Rubio // gonchuki
Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 17:25:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:46 UTC