W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2006

RE: About tests 37-41 (headers) *wkey

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 14:07:08 -0500
To: "'Chris Ridpath'" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>, "'Johannes Koch'" <koch@w3development.de>, "'WCAG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00fb01c66ee4$c6a99840$ee8cfea9@NC6000BAK>

No

See last message.  The SC only requires what it says it requires.  

Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Chris Ridpath
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:49 PM
To: Johannes Koch; 'WCAG'
Subject: Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) *wkey


Johannes wrote:
> X(HT)ML documents don't need to be valid to be parsable. They just 
> have to be wellformed.
> --
Let's not forget that there are many ways to parse a document. Even an XML
document that is not well formed may still be parsed using other rules (such
as sentence/word).

But I think the intent of the guideline is that X(HT)ML documents be at
least well formed. I think that was what Gregg was referring to:

> Yes, any code that does not parse properly.   Take any html page and 
> delete
> markup.   You can do this in many ways that will appear normal when viewed
> through a browser (because they have repair techniques built in) - but 
> they do not parse properly if you don't employ repair techniques.

The SC intent says that AT "can accurately interpret parsable content".

Can you accurately interpret parsable content without a set of rules (DTD,
schema etc.)? I think the answer is no. You must have the rules in order to
properly interpret the content. This is what makes me think that the SC
means you must have valid code.

So does the SC 4.1.1 mean your X(HT)ML must be well formed and also
validate?

Cheers,
Chris
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2006 19:07:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:46 GMT