- 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