- From: Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 21:28:13 +0200
- To: "'Tina Holmboe'" <tina@greytower.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tina Holmboe Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 8:48 PM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: Balancing the myth-busting. I've argued the need for valid code and how it is important for accessibility for the last ten years. I'm afraid people still don't agree with me, or you, Gez. Roberto Scano: I repeat that I don't see group consensus about validity. Is possible to make a ballot for this? With a simple question like: Did you consider validity as important for accessibility of web contents? What level of accessibility should code validity be ? [and eventually a note field] We are waiting for this also in AU WG: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JulSep/0053.html Otherwise we go ahead with this for months (and I continue to say in every situation that invalid code could cause inaccessibility to people that use web contents - but someone said that WAI is only for people with disabilities (like the guideline 2 of old WCAG 1.0, where using black text with black background will guarantee a level AA of accessibility...): think that we will decide the future of web contents: we are not joking or defending companies policies/products (i hope).
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2005 19:28:35 UTC