- From: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:41:27 -0500
- To: dd@w3.org, w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
- Cc: w3t-qa@w3.org
I like that level of specificity. I'm wondering: in the html example could we make the info in the comment field more machine readable? In fact, if we have a way to point into an invalid html document, do we even need the comment, since the expected result is pointing to it? Len At 04:49 PM 3/14/01 +0100, Daniel Dardailler wrote: >3) a web page has an HTML syntax error > >on 2001/03/14 sean@w3.uk, says that: > web-content at http://example.org/page > fails > comments: syntax error, line12, missing ul > http://w3.org/html4/testassertion123 > according to http://validator.w3.org/html > auto mode > purpose: checking html4 dtd content model > expected result: see w3.org/tr/html4#ul -- Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D. Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple University (215) 204-2247 (voice) (800) 750-7428 (TTY) http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday mailto:kasday@acm.org Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2001 12:40:52 UTC