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

Re: Validity

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:09:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB50B2D4981@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
To: "Paul Walsh" <paul.walsh@segalamtest.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Validity does not equal accessibility.
> An accessible website can still contain invalid code

NO ONE IS CONTESTING THE ABOVE TWO POINTS!!!

These comes up every time we try to discuss why validity should be P1, and it is a huge distraction.

> If a website passes every checkpoint but contains invalid code, it's
impossible to say that some assistive technologies will not work
properly, why?
> Because every checkpoint wouldn't have passed.

I just gave you an example (nested data tables) where all WCAG1 P1 checkpoints pass, but some assistive technologies (Jaws screen reader) don't work properly.  What more do you want?
Received on Saturday, 5 November 2005 16:09:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:40 GMT