- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 15:37:19 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, 18 May 2012 12:48:55 +0200 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > So making this depend on the generator information couples things > that are only slightly related, and creates incentive to add bogus > generator information when it shouldn't be there, or to remove it > when it should be there. Indeed. If the ability to suppress a particular class of error messages from validation reports is needed, then it makes more sense use a specific signal for that particular preference. This could be a different <meta> element... <meta name="alternative_text" content="nowarn"> Or even better, a boolean option built into the validator's UI. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 14:35:43 UTC