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/>
       --This.
       --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, 5 February 2014 23:39:37 UTC