- From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:45:33 -0400
- To: "Johannes Koch" <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>, <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
> 3. The HTML Techniques and the HTML test suite cover HTML and XHTML 1.0, > as mentioned in the Abstract, not e.g. XHTML 1.1, XHTML Basic 1.0 or even > XHTML 2.0, although, the procedure for test 48 mentions "XHTML 1.1 or > higher". So either the test suite is about HTML, XHTML 1.0 and upwards, > then the procedure should be rephrased to "4. If the content is XHTML > based on XHTML modularization ..." (which would include XHTML Basic 1.0), > or the fourth item should be removed. > I assumed that the techniques and test suite would cover html and xhtml and other versions of these technologies that were similar. I also assumed that xhtml basic was sufficiently similar that it could be grouped together with the other markup languages. The exclusion of the lang attribute from the html element in xhtml basic seems like a minor point. However there may be major differences which would require a separate set of techniques and test suite for xhtml basic. Has anyone looked at the differences, in terms of accessibility, between xhtml basic and other versions of xhtml? Cheers, Chris
Received on Monday, 8 August 2005 13:46:03 UTC