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

Re: CSS Parsed Unambiguously

From: Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:07:49 +0200
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20060612165741.02abb778@mailserv.esat.kuleuven.be>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org


At 17:50 12/06/2006, Tina Holmboe wrote:

>On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 04:36:07PM +0200, Christophe Strobbe wrote:
>
> > This example also shows the limitation of SC 4.1.1 when applied to CSS.
> > Suppose you had the following style rules (instead of the border-width
> > example):
> >
> > body { background: white; color: black; }
> > h1 { background: black; color: whitd; } /* reverse the colours, but with
> > typo in 'white' */
>
>   So, basically, we /do/ have a case of what I asked last week: a stylesheet
>   can pass SC 4.1.1 and be harmful to accessibility - both at the same time.

Yes, but one could argue that the text in the above example is still there
and selecting it or using adapted accessibility settings in your user agent
can make it visible again. On the other hand, if it is not visible (and
you're not using a screen reader), why would you assume the text is there?

Examples like this are not the only arguments against this weak SC 4.1.1:
there is something very hypocritical about claiming that technology X is
in your baseline and using illegal or invalid code at the same time.

Regards,

Christophe


-- 
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on 
Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/ 


Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Monday, 12 June 2006 15:08:03 GMT

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