RE: validity.htm

----- Messaggio originale -----
    Da: "Andrew Kirkpatrick"<akirkpatrick@macromedia.com>
    Inviato: 09/11/05 17.15.40
    A: "Bailey, Bruce"<Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
    Oggetto: RE: validity.htm
        
    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.
    
 Roberto:
If they declare wcag 1.0 double A they must have valid code. If they have a wcag 1.0 level A focus, the real accessibility is really poor.