- From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:29:35 +0000
- To: Paul Walsh <paul.walsh@segalamtest.com>
- Cc: Roberto Castaldo <r.castaldo@iol.it>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hi Paul, > We certify sites every week and if we were to failed them as a result of > invalid code, the vast majority of them would fail - even though they > meet all Double-A and two checkpoints in Treble-AAA. If they're invalid, then they couldn't pass all priority 2 checkpoints, as checkpoint 3.2 requires that documents validate to formal grammars. > I will reiterate, introducing validity > to the lowest level of conformance (whilst ignore the fact that a site > can be accessible) will alienate people from using the WAI, me included. I think it's also fair to say that the opposite will also be true if validity isn't addressed at all. Best regards, Gez -- _____________________________ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com
Received on Saturday, 5 November 2005 17:29:49 UTC