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

RE: validity.htm

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpatrick@macromedia.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 08:15:40 -0800
Message-ID: <DC9D05204B1E16419D62C12561C93221064CAF63@p01exm01.macromedia.com>
To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

> 22.  The evidence is that the one-way statistical correlation 
> between sites that are valid to those that are accessible is 
> too overwhelming to be explained away by the hypotheses offered.

Sure, there may be a correlation, but given that we've established that
sites with validity issues can also be accessible, it is not a causal
relationship between validity and accessibility.  The correlation may be
caused if the careful, professional developers who choose to attend to
validity are more likely to also attend to accessibility.

What would be interesting to see is a study of sites where the developer
had accessibility as a goal and those sites divided into two groups -
those where validity was or was not an additional goal.  That would be a
fairer comparison that would remove the mass of developers who care
neither about validity nor accessibility.

Received on Wednesday, 9 November 2005 16:16:17 UTC

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