- 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