W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > March 2006

Re: Accessibility Tests For Stanca Act

From: Jon Ribbens <ertwg@sitemorse.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 04:52:48 +0100
To: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <20060331035248.GE11746@snowy.squish.net>

Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be> wrote:
> Deprecated features was not the best example to choose for my argument
> (but it's what started the thread).
> However, take a look at CP 3.3: "Use style sheets to control layout and
> presentation."
> Every user agent has a built-in stylesheet or presentation, so you could
> argue that the content always passes the checkpoint even if the developer
> fails process-wise.

I don't get you. That interpretation is clearly ridiculous, and
although the WCAG 1.0 may not often be a paragon of clarity and
precision, if they had meant a particular checkpoint to read
"this checkpoint is redundant and may never be failed no matter what
the content", I'm sure they would have said so.
Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 03:53:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:53 UTC