- From: Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:08:18 +0200
- To: public-wai-ert@w3.org
At 11:10 30/03/2006, Johannes Koch wrote: >Christophe Strobbe wrote: > >>At 16:29 29/03/2006, Jon Ribbens wrote: >> >>>Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> wrote: >>> > One of the things I found surprising is the requirement for web >>> > sites to validate as 'strict'. >>> >>>It's not that surprising, it's effectively also a requirement for >>>WCAG 1.0 "AA" compliance (checkpoints 3.2 and 11.2). >> >>Hmm. I don't see the word "strict" in those success criteria. >>For conformance to WCAG 1.0 you can still use the transitional DTDs >>and avoid their deprecated features. > >Well, yes. But why do you reference a transitional document type when you >use only markup from the strict one? - Legacy data; - clean up deprecated markup without touching doctype (for whatever reason, e.g. save some time to fix more important things); - allow adding deprecated attributes by means of JavaScript (so document is still valid with transitional DTD but not with a strict one); - most importantly, "avoid" in WCAG 1.0 is a guideline for developers, not a prohibition regarding markup (unlike WCAG 2.0, WCAG 1.0 does not have success criteria for content, but only guidelines, i.e. advice, to developers); - other reasons? Regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2006 10:08:25 UTC