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

Re: Validation as test for basic accessibility

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 12:24:32 -0500 (EST)
To: webmaster@dors.sailorsite.net
cc: Web Accessibility Initiative <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0001191221420.3739-100000@tux.w3.org>
When http://www.betterhealth.com.au was launched in early 1998 it validated
but did not meet the requirements to be level-A compliant to WCAG. (Last I
lookewd they had made a number of improvements and I think it may now be
level-A although I am not certain).

In fact it is easy enough to make this happen.

The point is not that validation equals accessibility, but that the two are
related, and often one is a goo indicator that the person has thought about
their site and done the other.

Charles McCN
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, 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/
  

--
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
21 Mitchell Street, Footscray, VIC 3011,  Australia 
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2000 12:24:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:47 GMT