W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2008

Re: several messages about alt

From: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:31:35 +1000
Message-ID: <5f37426b0804130731g52b3cd40u71a03b198021f1e6@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: HTML4All <list@html4all.org>, "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>

On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 10:05 PM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:
>  In theory, HTML5 conformance and HTML5 validity are the same thing. In
> practice, though, people tend to think that validity is what a validator
> checks, which is machine-checkable conformance criteria.

Yes, HTML5 conformance is what I meant. Thanks for the explanation.

>  Examples of non-machine-checkable conformance criteria:
>   * "The img must not be used as a layout tool." (HTML 5)
>   * "Authors must only use elements, attributes, and attribute values for
> their appropriate semantic purposes." (HTML 5)

I think the above are very similar, for many of us, to "always supply
appropriate alt text with an image" which may complicate our
discussions.

For the type of publishing I usually deal with (not personal HTML
emails) I draw on WCAG for advice on quality checking (conformance).
I'm fine if HTML5 conformance criteria are targeted to cover a broader
range of HTML use (personal emails, photo blogs etc). WCAG includes
valid markup as a criteria, then builds upon it with extra checks and
balances to optimise accessibility. This approach should continue to
work well.

(in this individual's opinion).

cheers
Ben
Received on Sunday, 13 April 2008 14:32:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:54 UTC