Re: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft

"Matt May" <mcmay@bestkungfu.com> wrote in message 
news:42E54165.7020002@bestkungfu.com...
> 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.

Of course you can, sites such as www.w3.org often make mistakes and deliver 
invalid XHTML, the browsers error correcct it into something that works, if 
invalid xhtml is a barrier to accessibility, then it needs to be in WCAG, as 
it's certainly not the case that invalid or even non-well formed XHTML 
causes any problems to the majority of user agents available today.

Jim.