- From: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:24:23 +0200
- To: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- CC: Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Becky, I think your premise hear that the DHTML road map will not be valid may be incorrect. The DHTML road map (worked on with IBM and the PF working group) is an example of the opposite, where this guideline has course the grammars that you need to be published, as an XHTML extension. Hence it will conform to formal grammars DTD or Schema- not in a long time, but in about a month or two after it was pointed out to the team that this was necessary. See comments in line Becky wrote: > > For example, The DHTML roadmap extensions that I and others are working on > are meant to help accessibility. .. > We are > working within the W3C to get this new technology fully supported in the > specifications. But, that takes time and until that happens I could not > conform to WCAG 2.0 if the validity requirement was at Level 1. WCAG 2.0 > should not restrict projects that are working to improve accessibility by > including Level 1 requirements that do not always guarantee accessibility. > > As I understand it, because of this WCAG 2.0 requirement, at level 1, an XHTML module will be published that conforms to the XHTML extension specification, that will enable all of the functionality of the current examples running with firefox. Note: XHTML is modular and easily extended - it will take one person a few days to do so. In other words this requirement has made your work more useful resulting in the grammars being made available to all, and promoting harmonization/unity of accessibility techniques and practices. All the best Lisa
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 14:25:22 UTC