W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2006

RE: How do you deal with false claims of accessibility conformance?

From: Terry Dean <Terry.Dean@chariot.net.au>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 15:55:29 +0930
To: "'Patrick H. Lauke'" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20060903062532.035D933EDEB@mail.sa.chariot.net.au>

Hi Patrick,

It hardly makes sense to declare a document type at the top of their page
and then not validate against it. Also they claim that their CSS have been
validated using the W3C CSS Validation Service implying that they are
compliant when in fact they are not. So what you are saying is that its ok
to do this sort of thing as long as it conforms to priority 1?

This is not the only example of false claims of conformance out there but
you'd expect a government site to at least be responsible and lead by


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke wrote:

They only refer to priority 1. Validity of HTML/CSS falls under checkpoint
3.2 "Create documents that validate to published formal grammars" 
which is a priority 2 checkpoint. So - without now checking up on whether
they do in fact follow all P1 points - the fact that their markup and
stylesheet are riddled with errors doesn't invalidate their claim.

Received on Sunday, 3 September 2006 06:25:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:34 UTC