W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: CheckPoint 3.2

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:59:37 -0400 (EDT)
To: Craig Hadley <craig@4thandgoal.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0110081557460.1833-100000@tux.w3.org>
As I recall it was based on the fact that HTML browsers (which were used to
read most web content at the time) mostly did not care about whether content
was valid (and often couldn't handle content if it was). This is no longer
the case, particularly with more XML content, and formats such as PDF. So it
is quite possible that valid content will becme a higher priority requirement
in WCAG 2.0

although this is just my personal 2 cents worth


Charles McCN

On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Craig Hadley wrote:


  Can someone tell me why CheckPoint 3.2 "Create documents that validate to
  published formal grammars" is a not Priority 1 requirement?

  So if asked "Can a web page be considered Priority 1 Compliant without valid
  html (or any other DTD)?", the answer is yes.

  Craig Hadley
  Madison, WI

Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 15:59:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:14 UTC