RE: CSS Parsed Unambiguously

Being error free is sufficient but not required to meet this SC.  

What in particular are you concerned about that is a common CSS error that
would cause an accessibility problem (that isnt aready addressed by another
SC)?

Thanks

Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Tina Holmboe
> Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 2:30 AM
> To: 'WAI WCAG List'
> Subject: Re: CSS Parsed Unambiguously
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 01:37:31AM -0500, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> 
> > I'm not sure I follow the question.
> 
>   I can rephrase:
> 
>    "Will a CSS file which is syntactically broken according to
>     CSS 2.1, but which can be unambiguously parsed with the aid
>     of section 4.2 of same, be able to meet the SC in question?"
> 
> 
>   A syntactically broken CSS file may very well have accessibility
>   impact - a discarded rule that lead to colour clashes that would
>   not occur without errors is a straight-forward example.
> 
>   The second question is simply this: if the answer to the first
>   question is "Yes", what, exactly, is measured?
> 
>   There can be no doubt what so ever that a broken CSS file can cause
>   accessibility problems, so wouldn't a more reasonable approach be
>   to require
> 
>     "The syntax of the CSS file must error free."
> 
>   or similar for the SC to be passed?
> 
> 
> --
>  -     Tina Holmboe                    Greytower Technologies (UK) Ltd.
>    tina@greytower.co.uk                  http://www.greytower.co.uk
>      +46 708 557 905

Received on Saturday, 10 June 2006 14:30:31 UTC