W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Validation in WCAG 2

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:12:56 +0000 (UTC)
To: WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0408181611020.19685@aristotle.multipattern.com>

>> But there are also some problems in the validation-issue. It is easy to 
>> make the transitional versions of HTML and XHTML validate but not that 
>> easy if you opt for "strict" or XHTML 1.1.

"Strict" does not mean "an entirely new language." It merely means 
"purer." I suppose it is in some way more difficult to use Strict 
DOCTYPEs, but not by a huge margin.

By far the most important thing is valid code. The flavour is less 
important, because the factors that distinguish valid code from tag soup 
*are identical in all valid pages*.

>  Personally I would like to see "validation" replaced with "Prior to
>  attempting a compliancy check against WCAG, ensure that all markup and
>  style languages in use are syntactically valid".

A fabulous idea.

-- 

     Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
     Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
     Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 16:13:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:44 UTC