- From: Vicente Luque Centeno <vlc@it.uc3m.es>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:16:56 +0200 (CEST)
- To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
- Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0506151633240.22733@violin.it.uc3m.es>
Hi, I agree that validation is a major step towards accessibility. In fact, I exposed at [1] a sentence classifing the accessibillty guaranteed by several XHTML dialects. I found that the following XHTML dialects are ordered in an increasing accesibility level, because some of the WCAG techniques are represented in their DTD or Schema (required atributes or required elements, for example). XHTML 1.0 Transitional XHTML 1.0 Strict XHTML 1.1 XHTML Basic 1.0 XHTML 2.0 As long as a Web page validates against most of the previous ones (if it is XHTML Basic 1.0 it will pretty surely validate all others except XHTML 2.0), there are some (not all) WCAG techniques guaranteed to be OK. [1] http://www.it.uc3m.es/vlc/wai/wcag20formal.html#doctype P.S.: Of course, I am not saying that validity implies accessibility, but validity may imply conformance to "some" WCAG techniques. On the other hand, I found that XHTML Basic 1.0 is a subset of XHTML 1.1, which is a subset of XHTML 1.0 Strict which is a subset of XHTML 1.0 Transitional. This implies that the stricter XHTML, the more accessible. Vicente Luque Centeno Dep. Ingeniería Telemática Universidad Carlos III de Madrid http://www.it.uc3m.es/vlc
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 15:17:01 UTC