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

RE: validity levels

From: Paul Walsh, Segala <paulwalsh@segala.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:18:40 +0100
To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <chaals@opera.com>, "'David'" <drooks@segala.com>, "'Johannes Koch'" <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>, "'ERT group'" <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20061019141837.452B82390AC7C@postie1.hosting365.ie>

-----Original Message-----
From: public-wai-ert-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wai-ert-
I think we need to say that implementors should find their own class as a  
subClass of pass, cannotTell, etc. Different people use different types of  
warning and putting one in is IMHO asking for people to get it wrong,  

[PW] I agree with Charles. 

Also, I have never witnessed the use of 'warnings' by testing professionals,
so I'd hate to introduce new terminology that isn't necessary. As Shadi
says, "some tools misuse 'warning'  as a conditional pass". 

I think these tools are misused, some users assume they can measure
compliance, this means 'warning' equals 'pass'. Scary!

Kind regards
Received on Thursday, 19 October 2006 14:18:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:54 UTC