I: FW: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft

I forward a comment of Gez Lemon about discussion.


-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Gez Lemon [mailto:gez.lemon@gmail.com] 
Inviato: luned́ 25 luglio 2005 22.46
A: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
Oggetto: Re: FW: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft


Hi Roberto,

In your argument, you made a good point that I missed. If tools generate
XHTML, and people later decide to serve it using the correct MIME type, it
will fail if the markup is invalid. Current browsers with XML support only
check for well-formedness, which trips enough people up when they try and
serve the correct content. If browsers used proper XML validating parsers,
the situation would be even worse.

My understanding is that ATAG is supposed to make publishing available to
everyone. If they allow tools to create invalid markup, then they're helping
create a situation where web development will only be possible for the
elite, which automatically puts people with cognitive disabilities at even
more of a disadvantage. Building websites is therapeutic for people with
some types of cognitive problems, and this could lock them out if XHTML
takes off properly.

As you correctly say, invalid documents do cause accessibility problems.
Errors such as duplicate ids, or cropped alternative text may seem trivial,
but can stop pages working completely in some assistive technologies, or
make them incomprehensible. Error correction can only play a small part in
this, and shouldn't be essential for people to receive documents.

You're doing a great job :-)

Best regards,

Gez

> 
> ----- Messaggio originale -----
> Da: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)"<rscano@iwa-italy.org>
> Inviato: 25/07/05 20.53.57
> A: "gv@trace.wisc.edu"<gv@trace.wisc.edu>, 
> "w3c-wai-au@w3.org"<w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
> Oggetto: RE: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft
> 
> 
> Yes Gregg, now and in future.
> Xhtml is xml-based and not well-formed code stop the code 
> representation. Passing from html to xml-based languages, validity is 
> important for rendering of the code. Here Jez explain
well.http://www.juicystudio.com/article/validity-accessibility.php
> Also assistive technologies browse wecontent following the DOM tree of the
page: break the tree means break reading.
> 
> ----- Messaggio originale -----
>     Da: "Gregg Vanderheiden"<gv@trace.wisc.edu>
>     Inviato: 25/07/05 20.46.07
>     A: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org"<w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
>     Oggetto: RE: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft
> 
>     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.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per 
> recuperare la restante parte.]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per 
> recuperare la restante parte.]
> 
> 


-- 
_____________________________
Supplement your vitamins
http://juicystudio.com

Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2005 07:45:13 UTC