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: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 10:39:15 -0700
Message-ID: <42B6FF43.8020404@w3.org>
To: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Cc: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Joe Clark wrote:

>
> Matt May wrote:
>
>> You've completely missed the other half of the problem, which is that 
>> we can find many examples of valid pages that are plenty inaccessible.
>
>
> That is an unsupported claim. Nobody has provided even the standard 
> three *real-world* examples that I repeatedly call for and never get.


You don't get them because you're not the boss of me, or anyone else for 
that matter, and nobody has agreed to your criteria but you.

I have already outlined a number of ways in which valid code can be 
inaccessible, which I recap here in handy list form:

- Non-semantic HTML (<b> or <font> instead of <h*>, <br> and * instead 
of lists)
- Missing metadata (<caption>, <tbody>)
- Missing functional code (<noframes>, frame titles)

If you can't find three examples of each of these in a day's worth of 
browsing, I'll eat my hat and both of my shoes.

And that's just the stuff that's inside the angle brackets. Being valid 
doesn't help any of it.

-
m
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 17:39:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:37 UTC