- From: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:40:58 +0200
- To: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Gez Lemon wrote: >On 20/06/05, Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it> wrote: > > >>faster and ram costing less, I can't see a reason for browser to not try >>to correct little code errors. But this is a sort of religious argument, >>I know. >> >> > >What's a little code error? With the permutations of possible "little" >errors, little ends up becoming very significant. Significant to the >point that some vendors have decided not to attempt it, and ride on >the back of a user-agent that is prepared to attempt it. > > I started making examples of little errors. A language attribute in a script tag. An ampersand not escaped. A meta tag not closed. A paragraph tag not closed among others. Other (little, as I can see) errors you can find in pages of Judy Brewers interview that Roberto posted. What kind of accessbility problem do this kind of errors have? I agree that it's difficult to sort the code errors regarding their impact on accessibility. But I think some errors are worse than others. Presentational tags and attribute are bad for accessibility. Examples like the one I made are fare less problematic. Maurizio
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 22:32:10 UTC