W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 1998

Re: latest version of the document

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 08:14:25 +1000 (EST)
To: Wendy A Chisholm <chisholm@trace.wisc.edu>
cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980625080654.10551A-100000@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>

E2 -use a valid DTD should be a Priority 1. Non-valid markup excludes an 
audience which uses UA xyz, unless we are asserting that all current UAs 
can cope with it...

How complex is a complex frame arrangement? two frames are often used so 
one provides navigationh and the other provides content. But not always 
by any means. Three frames opens heaps of possibilities - two navigation 
sets, a non-functional banner, are two which spring to mind as real 
examples. I feel that all framesets should have meta-information 

Tables are a bit different - there needs to be a real discussion.

Should there be a list of Don'ts? I know that it is not popular on its 
own, but for people who don't really know much about HTML (and there are 
thousandsof those in Australia generating web content for important 
services) it would probably be helpful. Or should that be outside the 
scope of a W3C recommendation?

Could the ratings go after the contents?

Just some first thoughts. It basically looks really good.

Charles McCN
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 1998 18:36:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:27 UTC