- From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 20:18:02 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hi David, On 09/08/05, David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk> wrote: > Trying to stay ahead of people who want an invalid document that > validates is pointless. I obviously disagree. I'm not saying there is a fool-proof method of checking for validity, but I think there is room for improvement. > Users can input data (e.g. cookies, query string) before the document > is loaded. And the problem with that is? The query string could be picked up by the validator. If the query string, or any other type of input such as cookies, is missing, then the script should cater for it. If it doesn't, it needs flagging as an error. > No, we would both like to see the problem addressed, just by different > ways. You appear to think that technology can solve the problem of > users not understanding what the tools they use are for, I think that > education is the only sensible way. I think technology could be improved, but also strongly believe that education is important. Please don't put words in my mouth, as I wouldn't do that to you. > > And that can only be done through education; the article on Juicy > > Studio is a start, as it will at least raise awareness of the problem. > > That statement contradicts the rest of your claims. How? Have I stated anywhere that education isn't important? I spend pretty much all of my spare time sharing information, so how have you come to that conclusion? Best regards, Gez -- _____________________________ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2005 19:18:08 UTC