W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers

From: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:55:31 -0700
Message-ID: <42B45203.5040109@w3.org>
To: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) wrote:

>We are talking now instead to some (and seems minor) group inside the working group that said that there are no possibility to set as level 1 due that web-hobbist are not ready.

Note that many of the WG that met in Brussels probably have been in 
transit. I may be (almost) alone in arguing the point, but I'm not 

It's also not about "hobbyists". It's about most of the authors on the 
Web -- and the vast majority of existing authoring tools. You're 
painting this as a small problem with some bad actors. Since it's been 
my full-time job for the last three years to fix problems like this, I 
can guarantee you that it is far more widespread. In fact, it's the 
status quo. It's simply not something we can legislate away.

>I remade my question: can a w3c rec.  authorize violation of another w3c rec.? I think is not allowed, but I ask to chair to check with Protocol and Formats working group.

Roberto, you do know that I'm the staff contact of the PFWG, right? I've 
also spoken with one of the HTML WG co-chairs, and while he agrees that 
it's a tough problem, he does recognize that this WG isn't here to 
enforce his WG's specs, but to aid accessibility. I will also take this 
to PF, but I think you're just shopping for someone who supports your 
point of view.

And again, silence is not authorization. How many times do I have to say 

>So making this violation means that I haven't access to a wcag 2.0 Level 1 web site with my webTV or my Firefox browser. This is accessibility for all or is accessibility at level 1 granted to vendors that produce tools that don't generate valid code?

Take it to AU. That's where discussion of authoring tool output belongs.

In fact, I've done it for you.


Received on Saturday, 18 June 2005 16:55:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:59:37 UTC