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

RE: Validity

From: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 16:46:58 +0100
To: <akirkpatrick@macromedia.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200511041041453.SM00784@Inbox>

----- Messaggio originale -----
    Da: "Andrew Kirkpatrick"<akirkpatrick@macromedia.com>
    Inviato: 04/11/05 16.27.06
    A: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)"<rscano@iwa-italy.org>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
    Oggetto: RE: Validity
      > Roberto:
    > Yew¨s but sorry, this is a vendor-technology and user agent 
    > issue, not a wcag issue.
    It is important for the group to decide whether it wants to operate in a vacuum or not. It is a WCAG issue if you want the document used.
Bob said clearly that is your/AT problem. WCAG should tell developers how to implement accessibility web contents.
Flash, imho, is like Java: an object with it's player that should be directly accessible.
 If i'm a flash developer and i work following your guidelines for make this object directly accessible i pretend that if i insert this object inside an html/xhtml page:
- the object don't damage my code conformance
- the browser, with your plugin installed, make contents accessible.
You instead are saying:
- we have developed this with embed
- at works well with this solution
- put invalid code and damage your page conformance
Received on Friday, 4 November 2005 15:44:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:57 UTC