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

RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days)

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:37:50 +0000 (UTC)
To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0506201736230.15178@aristotle.multipattern.com>

> Here is a very small example in which valid code doesn't guarantee 
> accessibility.

I thank the cochair for his contribution. However, it wasn't what I am 
looking for. I need URLs to three real-world Web sites-- not 
custom-crafted just for this discussion and not code snippets-- that have 
valid code and provable accessibility defects.

Given John's evidence, we also have to evaluate claims of inaccessibility 
against user agents that don't understand the very stable HTML spec.


     Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
     Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
       --What's wrong with top-posting?
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 17:38:02 UTC

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