- From: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:41:21 +0100 (MET)
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> "Thus, I can live with a requirement at level 1 that my code is > well-formed - that is good coding practice and can help > accessibility. Are we really doing us a favor if we include yet another dimension in this anyhow "challenging" validity discussion? What are the advantages of well-formedness? I slap myself remembering that we already had this discussion months ago, and that it apparently didn't work out. I also bite in the edge of my table that we now just have the same debate as with validity per se, and that's why I question to include another dimension right now. Committing to standard compliance (and that's not "well-formedness") helps accessibility by binding tools and authors to a common grammar, which in turn benefits users who at one time or another don't need to worry anymore about parsing, layout, and finally access problems. P1 validity sets a signal, and it is one little thing to make the guidelines more reliable and future-proof. -- Jens Meiert Information Architect http://meiert.com/ < Reloaded | Webdesign mit CSS (O'Reilly, 228 pages, German) | In theatres November 28th: http://meiert.com/cssdesign/
Received on Wednesday, 9 November 2005 10:41:26 UTC