W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft

From: Matt May <mcmay@bestkungfu.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:45:41 -0700
Message-ID: <42E54165.7020002@bestkungfu.com>
To: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
CC: jan.richards@utoronto.ca, w3c-wai-au@w3.org

Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) wrote:

>If an authoring tool generates xhtml and it's no valid, when served as application/xhtml+xml some browsers end the page execution: this means no accessibility for all. 
>  
>
Which is why validity doesn't need to be in the WCAG spec to satisfy 
XHTML. In XHTML, being valid (or at least well-formed) is an 
architectural constraint: you can't fail to do it and still be usable in 
any form. It's as useless to require it in WCAG as it is to require in a 
building accessibility document that front doors aren't built 20 feet 
off the ground.

That said, it's well in scope for ATAG 2, since it's the only way we 
know that the final output will be rendered no matter how the server is 
configured.

-
m
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2005 01:41:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:53:05 GMT