- From: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:18:18 +0200
- To: <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, <joeclark@joeclark.org>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
So if screen readers don't respect code of 1998, we need to authorize violations? So for the same, if IE don't support application/xhtml+xml or if an AT don't support an element w shouldn't use it? And what about device independence? AT are UA and UA are output device... If it's a Jaws bug, suggest to correct it instead of request rec. Violation. ----- Messaggio originale ----- Da: "John M Slatin"<john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu> Inviato: 20/06/05 19.03.55 A: "Joe Clark"<joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-GL"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Oggetto: RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Joe Clark wrote: <blockquote> Nobody has provided even the standard three *real-world* examples that I repeatedly call for and never get. </blockquote> Here is a very small example in which valid code doesn't guarantee accessibility. The following table validates for HTML 4.01 transitional. JAWS 5.0 and 6.10 do not recognize it as a table. Home Page Reader 3.04 handles it properly. This is clearly a user agent issue (JAWS should be able to recognize this table in its sleep). I mention it because tables have been identified as cases where valid code is essential. <code> <table> <thead> <tr> <th colspan="4" scope="col">Building Accessible Web Sites </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>HTML</td> <td>PDF</td> <td>MS Word</td> <td>DAISY</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </code> "Good design is accessible design." John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Accessibility Institute University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/ -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Joe Clark Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 11:55 am To: WAI-GL Subject: Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) [Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 17:18:43 UTC