W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > June 2006

WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission

From: WCAG 2.0 Comment Form <nobody@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:25:31 +0000 (GMT)
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Message-Id: <20060615122531.9E43247B9F@mojo.w3.org>

Name: Robert Whittaker
Email: robert.whittaker@gmail.com
Document: W2
Item Number: (none selected)
Part of Item: 
Comment Type: GE
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
The definition of \"parsed unambiguously\" is rather ambiguous, and the gudelines themselves don\'t explain what is required. Does this mean a particular UA must have the same structure on each parsing of the same page (which only requires that UA behave deterministically) or that *all* UAs get the same structure (which is impossible without having all UAs store their data in the same way)?

For accessibility, it is vital that data be presented in a manner that complies with a published standard - otherwise how do UA-makers, or people who want/need to write their own parsing tools know what to expect and how to handle the data. With a multiplicity of UAs, the only sensible interpretation of \"parsed unambiguously\" is that the data stream complies with a published standard. That being the case, the guidelines should state this.

Proposed Change:
Simplify and strengthen the guidelines by removing the concept of \"parsed unambiguously\", and replace it with a guideline that says that data formats used must comply with a published specification (to be referenced in the baseline).

(Of course this may be an author-published one - though authors should be discouraged from doing so.)
Received on Thursday, 15 June 2006 12:25:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:06 UTC