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: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 12:52:54 -0500
Message-ID: <6EED8F7006A883459D4818686BCE3B3B0124865B@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu>
To: "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Joe Clark wrote:

<blockquote>
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.
</blockquote>

Just for the record, the code I sent wasn't created for the purposes of
this discussion-- I was investigating techniques for providing links to
multiple versions of the same title without having to make authors
repeat the title for each link to a different version of the title. I
fully expected JAWS to handle it.

I completely agree that contemporary user agents, including contemporary
assistive technologies, should render valid code.

And I am not arguing one side or the other in what has now become a
religious debate. It just seemed to me that the case I sent might
complicate things and I'm curious as to how or whether others involved
in this discussion think it affects anything.

John the Cockhare

The example I sent just happens to be an instance of a case where valid
code doesn't guarantee accessibility.


"Good design is accessible design." 
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/


 



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Joe Clark
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 12:38 pm
To: WAI-GL
Subject: RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of
resolutions from last 2 days)



> 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 17:52:58 UTC

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