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

Re: Validation: what criteria in L1, L2 or L3?...

From: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:55:08 +0200
Message-ID: <42BB21AC.4060403@usabile.it>
To: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Yes, but what is the criteria? What do you put in level 2 and 3, and why?

Every issue covered by wcag has sometimes an accessibility impact, of 
course. But in the real world (and thanks to the browser we now have, 
ironically) any user can often (and not always) live without "some 
amount of" valid code, but blind users can *never* live without alt text 
on meaningful images.

That's why I'd put this in L1, and validation in L2 or, even better, in 
L3: it's not vital. You can cope with invalid page as long as they are 
rendered by browser (i.e, text/html content can: we know their render 
engine): that's what happens in most of the sites. But you can't cope 
with missing information.

I see no reason to put validation in L1, but it depends on criteria. But 
then we should be consistent with every issues. In any other cases, we 
are discussing without rules, and everyone can emphasize his favourite 
arguments. And that can be done about any wcag issue.

Maurizio



Tina Holmboe wrote:

> On 23 Jun, Maurizio Boscarol wrote:
>  
>
>> I can't undertand the criteria with which most of you want to put 
>> Validity in L1.
>>
>> If the criteria is "non valid pages MAY lead to problem of 
>> accessibility", can some of you explain what kind of statement could
>> we put in L2 and even L3?
>>
>> What kind of issues would you put in L2 and L3 and *why*? Should the 
>> "reasonable effort" become a part of criteria or it shouldn't?
>>
>> Seriously, I can't understand your overestimation of validation, 
>> ignoring a whole world of disabled users (not only blind user) that
>> use pages despite of validation issues.
>>   
>
>
>  All right. Let me try to explain my point of view with these two
>  questions:
>
>    Can you, or anyone else, guarantee that under no circumstances will
>    a syntax error, or a combination of syntax errors, in any user-agent
>    make it impossible for a user to access the information on the site?
>
>  and
>
>    Can you, or anyone else, guarantee that under no circumstances will
>    a missing alt-text in any user-agent make it impossible for a user
>    to access the information on the site?
>
>  
>
Received on Thursday, 23 June 2005 20:46:32 UTC

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