- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:47:58 +0000
Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > They do mention validation: > http://www.anysurfer.be/fr/obtenir-label/procedures-de-labellisation/la-validation/ > -- though I'm not sure they mean "ensuring valid HTML". I'm afraid they mean validating to /their/ accessibility standards, not the (X)HTML specifications. (The page in question has 37 XHTML validation errors.) Some discussion of the reasoning behind not requiring validation can be found at: http://veerle.duoh.com/index.php/blog/comments/a_response_from_an_accessibility_consultant_from_blindsurfer/ (NB AnySurfer used to be called BlindSurfer.) And for another example of accessibility-orientated developers decisively rejecting validation, seemingly with RNIB's tacit acceptance, consider LightMaker (creators of the flagship "accessible" Flash at J. K. Rowling's website): http://www.rnib.org.uk/wacblog/news/just-how-accessible-is-the-web-bbc-1s-click-investigates/ I explain why inserting deliberate errors into their own markup was counter-productive in comments there, so I won't repeat myself here. :) -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Friday, 15 December 2006 07:47:58 UTC