- From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpatrick@macromedia.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 08:36:02 -0800
- To: "Roberto Scano \(IWA/HWG\)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Roberto: > If they declare wcag 1.0 double A they must have valid code. > If they have a wcag 1.0 level A focus, the real accessibility > is really poor. Sorry. I meant accessible to users, not to guidelines. The study I'd like to see is a study of sites where the developer had accessibility as a goal and those sites divided into two groups - those where validity was or was not an additional goal. The accessibility would be measured by users, not by WCAG/508/CLF/etc. criteria. That would be a fairer comparison that would remove the mass of developers who care neither about validity nor accessibility. AWK
Received on Wednesday, 9 November 2005 16:36:34 UTC