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: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:16:35 +0200
Message-ID: <42B7CCE3.1000707@usabile.it>
To: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Gez Lemon wrote:

>On 21/06/05, Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I know that potential problems with ampersand exist. But most of the
>>time they don't come up. They aren't surely broken: they may be broken
>>    
>>
>
>Most of the time isn't all of the time. Why are you insisting on 100%?
>  
>

Just because we have to decide the level of this point, not if this 
point may be a problem for accessibility. I think it may be a problem. 
But I think, if compared with many other points we put on level 1, level 
2, level 3, and with levels criteria, that it should be on level 3.

Otherwise, why discuss about priority? Everything may be a problem, so 
let's put everything in unique level of priority!


>There are far too many validity mistakes that could result in
>accessibility issues to list. If this mistake is covered by another
>guideline, there will be others that won't. So it comes down to what's
>a serious mistake and what's a little mistake. Shall we start to make
>a list?
>  
>

But we *are making a list!*- A sort of. We are dividing things in 
priorities, possibly using a common criterium (defined in the draft).

Maurizio
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 08:07:47 UTC

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