W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-uaag-editor@w3.org > December 2007

RE: [FYI] Is there a better answer? [was: Re: Accesibility Validaytor]

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:29:39 -0600
To: 'Al Gilman' <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>, w3c-wai-cg@w3.org
Cc: wai-uaag-editor@w3.org, "'Ian B. Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>
Message-id: <006201c83e76$e83f6170$a117a8c0@NC84301>

Pretty good

One other place to cite would have been

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/12/change-summary#Validity


Gregg
 -- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-cg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-wai-cg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Al Gilman
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:56 AM
> To: w3c-wai-cg@w3.org
> Cc: wai-uaag-editor@w3.org; Ian B. Jacobs
> Subject: [FYI] Is there a better answer? [was: Re:
> Accesibility Validaytor]
>
>
> Ian got hit with this random public question.
>
> Owing to history, he bounced it to UAAG.
>
> I'm not sure if EO, EOT, or WCAG should take the lead on an
> answer to a question like this, but the question seems to be
> about accessibility rating/claims for content, not browsers.
> In other words, not UAAG.
>
> Rather than leave the question in bureaucratic limbo bouncing
> around from desk to desk, I invested 15 minutes or so in some
> Googling and came up with the answer below.
>
> archived at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/0039.html
>
> Anybody aware that we have a better answer, please jump in,
> write to the questioner and let us know you did.
>
> Al
>
> PS:  I'm pretty sure this is a question we get, and will get, often.
>
> PPS:  .. and another 15 minutes or so in this process cleanup.
>
> At 8:27 AM -0600 14 12 2007, Ian B. Jacobs wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >I have forwarded your question to my WAI colleagues; I am no longer
> >actively involved in the project.
>
> Gokhan,
>
> Please look over:
>
> Understanding levels of conformance:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20071211/con
> formance.html#uc-levels-head
>
> .. as linked from
>
> WCAG20 Layers of Guidance
> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#intro-layers-guidance
>
> .. and
> Conformance Evaluation of Web Sites for Accessibility
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/conformance.html
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Al
>
> >
> >Thank you,
> >
> >  _ Ian
> >
> >On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 10:28 +0200, Gokhan Arzi wrote:
> >>  Dear W3C,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  We have a few questions regarding W3C accessibility.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  -         Do you separate the rules like essentials and optionals?
> >>
> >>  -         Can we say that we are Accesibility compatible, if
> >>  validators do not generate errors?
> >>
> >>  -         In order to have an "accessible" content and
> clean codes,
> >>  should all errors and warnings be fixed?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  These questions are really crucial for us.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  Hope to hear from you soon.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  Best regards.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  Gökhan ARZI™
> >>
> >>  Web Developer
> >>
> >>
> >>  nexum creative
> >>
> >>  Head Office: Maslak Meydan Sok.Spring Giz Plaza
> >>  Kat: 14 80670 Maslak / I™stanbul
> >>  Tel : + 90 212 328 19 29
> >>  Fax: + 90 212 328 19 33
> >>  e-mail: g.arzi@nexumcreative.com
> >>
> >>  www.nexumcreative.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >--
> >Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
> >Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
> >
> >
> >Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
> >Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
> >
> >Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:signature 510.asc (    /
>   ) (0019FC27)
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 14 December 2007 17:30:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:21:28 GMT