W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: accessify.com's review of RNIB relaunch

From: James Craig <work@cookiecrook.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:18:13 -0500
Message-ID: <3EFA1195.2070907@cookiecrook.com>
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
CC: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>
>On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 09:37 AM, James Craig wrote:
>>I think the only accessibility difference between using valid HTML 
>>versus valid XHTML is that XHTML conforms to standard well-formed XML 
>>rules and could therefore be used and displayed by /any/ XML parser. 
>>The "accessibility" benefit doesn't necessarily relate to people with 
>>disabilities but instead just refers to "access for all".
>
>Such as what, though?

Such as:
  - A customed designed kiosk?
  - That refridgerator that downloads recipes?
  - Some old WAP phone made with WML in mind but not HTML?
  - Some new mobile device?
  - That car that downloads it's own OS updates?
  - etc., etc.

I've got more if you want 'em. ;) The reasons behind moving hypertext to 
semantic XML are highly steeped in future-compatibility and 
accessibility, whatever that future may be. People today are still too 
hung up on "web browsers" and fail to see the potential of opening the 
web up to user-agents in a myriad of devices.

>XHTML also has the drawback that, if there is a single error, it will
>not display in any XHTML browser or XML parser.

Good. Why is that a drawback? Setting rules for those devices is a good 
thing. It keeps the developers accountable for high-quality work. 99% of 
all the web programmers I've had dealings with were lazy when it came to 
HTML.

In hindsight, a lot of people consider it a drawback that HTML was 
/ever/ "forgiving". It allowed all those developers to become lazy.

Too many developers have the mindset that "if it works, it works" but 
they don't realize that it /doesn't/ work all the time. These same lazy 
developers would jump at a bug that lost 1 in 10,000 bank transactions, 
but don't care if a website can't serve 1 in 100 visitors. Do all you 
can to make sure it does work all the time by *validating* your code. At 
least then if it doesn't work, it's not your fault.

--- whoa there ---

Sorry 'bout that. Went off into a bit of a rant. Anyway, I realize the 
internet will never be as utopian as it should be, and chances are that 
I'll never get that refridgerator, but it doesn't hurt to plan for the 
future. That's all the W3C is doing with XHTML.

Cheers,
James Craig

-- 
http://www.cookiecrook.com/
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 17:18:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:10 GMT