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

Re: Validation as test for basic accessibility

From: Brian Kelly <lisbk@ukoln.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 15:21:17 -0000
Message-ID: <03ab01bf6423$29907830$3c92268a@bath.ac.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, Harvey Bingham <hbingham@acm.org>
> At 2000-01-20 14:03-0500, Len Kasday wrote:
> >There's been a lot of opinions here, including mine, so I just want
> >to check something.  I think everyone would concur with the
following.
> >
> >1. Making a page valid HTML 4 doesn't guarantee accessibility.
>
> Right. Even the strict.dtd for HTML 4.0 allows tag abuse and potential

Reminds me of the time I was on one of the WWW conference program
committees.  Authors were instructed to submit papers as valid HTML (2.0
I think it was) documents.

One author supplied a paper which consisted of
...
<img src="page1.gif" alt="page 1 of paper">
....
<img src="page20.gif" alt="page 1 of paper">

The images (photocopies of hardcopy output) were barely legible.  It was
pointed out that the author had, in fact, followed the submission
guidelines - it was a valid HTML document but not what the program
committee had expected.

Brian

BTW the paper was not accepted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Kelly, UK Web Focus
UKOLN, University of Bath, BATH, England, BA2 7AY
Email:  b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk     URL:    http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
Homepage: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly.html
Phone:  01225 323943            FAX:   01225 826838
Received on Friday, 21 January 2000 10:23:03 GMT

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