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: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:33:02 +1000
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <20050627093302.GA6384@jdc>


Another option would be to require validity only of content written in 
XML-based markup languages. That way, people could write invalid legacy 
HTML as much as they wanted at level 1.

I am not proposing this, just adding it to the list of options.

Received on Monday, 27 June 2005 09:34:11 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Tim Boland: "Fwd: [Proposed Recommendation] QA Specification Guidelines"
Previous message: Joe Clark: "Web Standards Project Accessibility Task Force"
In reply to:(deleted message) Maurizio Boscarol: "Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days)"
Next in thread: Isofarro: "Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days)"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:38 GMT