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

Re: Validity as a technique

From: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:33:20 +0100
Message-ID: <436FD630.7040703@usabile.it>
To: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
CC: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, Yvette Hoitink <y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

John M Slatin wrote:

>Bruce Bailey wrote:
>
><blockquote>
>Even with the glossary, "programmatically determined" is horribly,
>horribly opaque.  Even for native English speakers.  Even for native
>English speakers who are familiar with 508 and WCAG1.  
></blockquote>
>
>The definition of "programmatically determined" most recently accepted
>by the Working Group is as follows:
><currentDefinition>
>Programmatically determined:
>Can be recognized by user agents, including assistive technologies, that
>support the technologies in the chosen baseline.
></currentDefinition>
>
>I hope this is somewhat less opaque.
>


Thanks, but it's not the meaning of "programmatically determined" that 
sounded opaque to me.

I simply think that validity as a document property isn't necessary to 
recognize the success criteria that can be programmatically determined.

I think that validation as a process is. But it can be also with an 
invalid page. If the page is invalid for an unclosed br, or a border 
attribute in img, then the success criteria can still be 
programmatically determined.

Anyway you look at it, it's not validity our topic... it's success 
criteria. Validation is a way to determine them.

Maurizio
Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 22:25:26 GMT

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