W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Validation as test for basic accessibility

From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 20:08:37 -0500
Message-ID: <38850E95.9B513301@clark.net>
To: wai-ig list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

All you say is true.
Validation DOES make accessiblity easier.  I does happen that sometimes
pages are valid before they are accesible, more often the reverse is
Almost always, by the time my pages validate, they ARE accessible.  I
agree the accessibility does not interfer with validity, and that the
is as important as the former.

If you have seen many pages that validate but are not accessible, please
provide a single URL.  The higher profile, the better.

Of course it is POSSIBLE to design pages that validate but are not
accessible.  I just don't believe that, in practice, this happens very


on 1/18/00 1:38 PM, David Poehlman at poehlman@clark.net wrote:
> I have made the assertion that validation makes it easier to produce
> accessable content but have seen many pages that validate but are not
> accessible.
> once a page has been validated, then the fun begins or if you are sure
> that your page will validate then make it accessible from the ground up
> and then validate it but don't break the accessability with the changes
> that validation suggests.
> Bruce Bailey wrote:
>> Dear Group,
>> I have made the assertion before that:  If a page validates, odds are that
>> it is accessible!  In light of recent discussions, I think that this point
>> warrants further promotion.  Before that though, it should be investigate
>> more.  To this end, I challenge members of this list to do a little
>> hunting...
>> Can anyone cite a URL for a live site that formally validates as HTML 4 but
>> does NOT meet the Priority 1 checkpoints of the WCAG?
>> Thank you.
>> Bruce Bailey
>> http://www.dors.state.md.us/
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2000 20:08:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:07 UTC