W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Validation ICON

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:10:40 +0100
Message-ID: <48B7AF00.6000604@googlemail.com>
To: Danny Moore <DannyMoore@Hometown-Services.com>
CC: www-validator@w3.org

Danny Moore wrote:
> Iím constructing a website that validates xhtml1.0 and would like to 
> display your icon although as you can see from the example here: 
> http://sitewerksinc.com/demo/test.html , the colors clash a great deal. 
> I would like to know if itís possible to display the valid-xhtml10.png 
> with color modification as in: valid-xhtml10gn.png

No. See: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/logo-usage-20000308.html .

Incidentally, I'd recommend taking heed of the warnings at:

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/sgml/intro.html#h-19.1

and

http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#validandconform

Validity is a subset of conformance. While your example document 
currently validates, it does not conform. For instance, the longdesc 
attribute takes a URI not a string of descriptive text:

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#adef-longdesc-IMG

For example:

longdesc="#same-page-full-text-equivalent-to-image"

longdesc="/path/to/full/text/equivalent/on/another/page.html"

Personally, I'd probably treat that particular image as a "furniture" 
image with no particular editorial meaning and use alt="" and no longdesc.

Lots of guidance on using alt and longdesc to provide text alternatives 
can be found at:

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#text-equiv

and

http://delicious.com/benjaminhawkeslewis/%28X%29HTML%3Aalt+guidance

Moreover, formal conformance is either a subset of, or orthogonal to, 
industry best practice.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 08:18:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:30 GMT