- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:46:07 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Did you mean it didn't work for everyone?
Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center
University of Wisconsin-Madison
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 1:11 PM
To: jan.richards@utoronto.ca; w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Subject: RE: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: "Jan Richards"<jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
[3] Validity debate:
COMMENT: My personal view is that validity is probably not "necessary
for a minimum level of accessibility" (i.e. a level 1 success criteria
item), but perhaps should be retained at a higher level.
Roberto:
If an authoring tool generates xhtml and it's no valid, when served as
application/xhtml+xml some browsers end the page execution: this means no
accessibility for all.
Received on Monday, 25 July 2005 18:46:21 UTC