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

Re: Is validity the real issue?

From: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:17:00 +0100 (MET)
To: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <27544.1131391020@www26.gmx.net>

> > > As you know, I personally think that something is better than
> > > nothing. :) So, the XML specification that say that UA shouldn't
> > > attempt to render invalid pages are wrong and against accessibility,
> > > because decrease the chance of someone accessing something.
> >
> > To stick with automotive metaphors, isn't this the same as saying
> > "just drive, you do not need to know the traffic rules, because it
> > might hinder you from driving"?
> 
> No, it isn't. The methaphor is unadequate. If you don't know traffic 
> rules, you'll end crash and kill someone, for sure. If you miss some 
> validation issue your page can still be accessible, and in many case it 
> is: disabled people (and UA, and AT) can copy with it.

No. There is also some probability that you cross the city unharmed, as
there on the other side is the risk that an invalid page might fail in
certain UAs. And this risk ain't quite low, as you need to anticipate a
future where more and more UAs behave more and more strict. So that risk is
definitely high, and the metaphor I used proves useful, I fear.


-- 
Jens Meiert
Information Architect

http://meiert.com/ < Reloaded

| Webdesign mit CSS (O'Reilly, 228 pages, German)
| In theatres November 28th: http://meiert.com/cssdesign/
Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 19:17:05 GMT

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