- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 11:08:53 +0100
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+VkNAA8kORKg7EwUCMs4HX1ARzT9w4H-OAKJ8OPCw2MHHw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Henri, The crux of the matter is that some > markup generator developers expect some people who evaluate the > quality of their generator to throw the output of the generator at a > validator and judge the generator negatively if the validator > complains. Therefore, these markup generator developers make the > output of their generators such that the validator won't complain > *when invoked the way the markup generator developers expect the > people who evaluate quality the generators to invoke the validator* > (i.e. with defalut settings). > > This scenario has been stated again and again ever since 2007. It's > pretty frustrating that the scenario is still being misunderstood. > Its also pretty frustrating that this scenario has been stated again and again, without actually the production of any data to confirm that markup generators actually add alt="" in order to stop the validation tools complaining. providing such data would knock any doubts on the head. regards SteveF On 5 August 2012 09:40, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Laura Carlson > <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: >> The crux of the matter has always been that two validator user groups >> 1.) authors 2.) engineers of large web applications have different >> goals. > > That's not the crux of the matter. The crux of the matter is that some > markup generator developers expect some people who evaluate the > quality of their generator to throw the output of the generator at a > validator and judge the generator negatively if the validator > complains. Therefore, these markup generator developers make the > output of their generators such that the validator won't complain > *when invoked the way the markup generator developers expect the > people who evaluate quality the generators to invoke the validator* > (i.e. with defalut settings). > > This scenario has been stated again and again ever since 2007. It's > pretty frustrating that the scenario is still being misunderstood. > >> How about the possibility of the vaildator having two >> separate yet side-by-side options based on the audience? A simple >> user interface mockup is at: >> http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/research/206/byaudience.html >> >> The idea would be to have an audience section at the beginning of the >> page. If the "Generator Developers" radio button is selected the new >> attribute would kick in and allow the page to pass validation. And if >> the "Authors" radio button is selected it wouldn't. Check out the >> mockup and and let me know what you think. > > This won't work, because people who evaluate the quality of markup > generators can be trusted to do so only in the "Generator Developers" > mode. It doesn't matter if running a validator with the default > setting on the output of a generator is the wrong way to evaluate the > quality of the generator. > > -- > Henri Sivonen > hsivonen@iki.fi > http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ > -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Sunday, 5 August 2012 10:10:04 UTC