Re: img@relaxed CP [was: CfC: Close ISSUE-206: meta-generator by Amicable Resolution]

hi Mike and all,

document (word, PDF etc) to html automated file conversion has been
cited as a use case for the alt exception.

I did  a quick check of a number of online conversion tools [1] for
microsoft word to HTML also checked google docs conversion of same,

none of them outputted conforming html of any flavour or inserted
alt="" on images.



On 1 August 2012 01:58, Michael[tm] Smith <> wrote:
> Edward O'Connor <>, 2012-07-31 15:13 -0700:
>> While this Change Proposal is both concrete and complete, I intend to
>> solicit comments from conformance checker developers which may result in
>> testimonials I would like to cite in the Rationale section.
> Speaking personally and only with my conformance-checker-developer hat on,
> I strongly support this change proposal. I've not talked with Henri about
> it yet, but if he were also supportive of it, then it's something we would
> implement support for in the sources (on which both the
> service and W3C Nu Markup Validation Service are based).
> Some specific parts of the CP that lead me to express support for it:
> 1. I agree with the statement in the CP which asserts that the general use
> case this CP is attempting to address is an important use case to address.
> The use case is valid, and I think we should all work together to try to
> find out a way to address it that we can all agree on. This CP seems to me
> to be the most viable CP for this issue so far that we actually have a
> chance of getting agreement on.
> 2. The observations in this CP about the need for "granular relaxation" for
> this use case are particularly important and need to be considered; I
> believe in particular the following statement makes an important point:
>   "The markup of large Web applications is typically partly generated from
>   code and partly sourced from hand-authored HTML templates. With an
>   all-or-nothing mechanism, there's no way to relax the conformance
>   criteria for only the portions of the document corresponding to
>   user-generated content, while retaining strict requirements on the
>   portions of markup from the hand-authored HTML templates.
> This CP addresses that particular use case. The meta@name=generator
> exception currently in the spec does not.
> 3. Related to #2, I agree with the following assertion about the positive
> effects of this proposed change:
>   "We enable engineers of large Web applications to catch markup errors that
>   they can do something about, without bothering them about markup errors
>   they can't do anything about."
> That's something which is of real-world concern to validator developers.
> When users attempt to validate documents and end up getting a large amount
> of error messages about potential problems which they have no means to
> correct directly themselves, we risk having them just give up and quit
> using the validator altogether. This is of very practical concern for
> anybody maintaining a validator: You want users to keep using your validator
> and to have the validator match their real-world needs as much as possible.
> Anyway, in summary and as I mentioned in #1, I think this CP provides a
> resolution that we have a good chance of getting agreement on among the
> people in the group who so far have been unable to reach agreement on it.
> So I hope everybody involved can consider it very carefully, with an open
> mind.  It's not a perfect solution for the problem. We're not going to find
> a perfect solution. But this is the best solution I've seen so far.
>   --Mike
> --
> Michael[tm] Smith

with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG | |
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
Web Accessibility Toolbar -

Received on Sunday, 5 August 2012 09:50:34 UTC