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

RE: Validity

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 11:42:31 -0600
To: "'WCAG WG mailing list'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009001c5e167$223bc270$ee8cfea9@NC6000BAK>

Audiences are not specified in baselines.  Only technologies.

Many companies want to conform to WCAG but cannot make claims.  So we can't
predicate any success criterion on what is in a claim since that would
require a claim.



 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Gez Lemon
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 11:13 AM
To: Bob Regan
Cc: WCAG WG mailing list
Subject: Re: Validity

Hi Bob,

On 04/11/05, Bob Regan <bregan@macromedia.com> wrote:
> I believe there needs to be a mechanism whereby an author may deviate
> from valid code for reasons specific to accessibility for the audience
> defined in their own baseline.

That would be a great start to working towards some kind of
compromise, which I believe was the intent of guideline 4.1 before the
meeting in Brussels. Would validity be considered acceptable if there
was an exception for instances where non-conformance improved
accessibility without degradation to other users?

Best regards,


Received on Friday, 4 November 2005 17:42:31 UTC

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