- From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 19:34:04 +0100
- To: "lguarino@adobe.com" <lguarino@adobe.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hi Loretta, On 09/08/05, lguarino@adobe.com <lguarino@adobe.com> wrote: > Gez, even if validity is important for accessibility, it is still > weaker than accessibility. Accessibility puts more constraints on the > author than just validity. So comparing a validity checker to an > accessibility checker is still apples and oranges. Especially when > your point is that the automatic checkers are missing accessibility > problems. Some accessibility validators do not check validity, even though validity is a priority 2 level requirement for WCAG 1.0. At the moment, validity is considered part of accessibility, and as the markup validator is an automated checker, to my mind, it belongs in the results. To me, it's more like comparing a big apple with a little apple rather than apples and oranges. I appreciate people's mileage will vary on this issue, in which case they can discard validity if it's not important to them. Best regards, Gez -- _____________________________ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2005 18:34:11 UTC