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

Re: Validity as a technique

From: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 22:56:54 +0100
To: <koch@w3development.de>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200511071650203.SM02800@Inbox>

Yes, is what i'm trying to say from my first post. I don't understand why we need to converge to a "mediation" if this is so clear...

----- Messaggio originale -----
    Da: "Johannes Koch"<koch@w3development.de>
    Inviato: 07/11/05 22.27.23
    A: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
    Oggetto: Re: Validity as a technique
    
    
    Yvette Hoitink wrote:
    > * We do not require it in the normative section (the guidelines), which
    > prevents legal actions against websites that are accessible but do not
    > validate because they used an attribute that isn't defined in the specs.
    
    If a valid document is required to meet the success criteria that 
    require something can be 'programmatically determined', invalid markup 
    documents cannot meet these success criteria, right?
    -- 
    Johannes Koch
    Spem in alium nunquam habui praeter in te, Deus Israel.
                              (Thomas Tallis, 40-part motet)
    
    
    

[Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]
Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 21:53:41 GMT

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