- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:44:41 -0700
- To: "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com>
- Cc: faulkner.steve@gmail.com, mjs@apple.com, public-html@w3.org, wai-xtech@w3.org
2009/10/21 T.V Raman <raman@google.com>: > > > Good question. > > Obviously, to an author willing to do the right thing, clearly > tell him use the "button". But I thought the whole pushback > against xhtml and the clean Web was that people wouldn't fix > things, and that we had to bend over backwards to make badly > written content work. Why is the yardstick that gets applied to > accessibility somehow different? >From my point of view the pushback against xhtml 1 was that was the draconian error handling, i.e. a small bug would render your hole site unusable. The pushback against xhtml 2 was the lack of backwards compatibility without adding enough value for users to switch. Neither of these seem applicable to the discussion here? I'll also note that xhtml 1 have gotten implemented in many browsers. I've personally done a fair amount of work myself to get it running as well as HTML in Firefox. > Makes me wonder .... perhaps > after a few more years of the "we the great programmers can > compile anything and everything into a presentable DOM", we'll go > back to trying to tell people how they should have done things > right in the first place. Having been around the block a few > times on the Web, I shall watch that next evolution with interest. I don't really understand what you're saying here. / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 21 October 2009 23:45:46 UTC