Re: WCAG 2.0 4.1.1 Parsing (elements have complete start and end tags)

> "4.1.1 Parsing: In content implemented using markup languages, elements
> have complete start and end tags, elements are nested according to their
> specifications, elements do not contain duplicate attributes, and any IDs
> are unique, except where the specifications allow these features. "
>


thanks James, that makes sense. though the wording could be clearer, while
I have always considered optional end tags to be OK others have interpreted
wcag as requiring them.

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>


On 9 February 2014 15:10, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com> wrote:

> Steve,
> The complete text is
> "4.1.1 Parsing: In content implemented using markup languages, elements
> have complete start and end tags, elements are nested according to their
> specifications, elements do not contain duplicate attributes, and any IDs
> are unique, except where the specifications allow these features. "
>
> As you have stated, the html specification allows certain end tags to be
> optional and some have no end tags so there is no issue with 4.1.1 as the
> specification allows these features.
>
> Regards,
> James
>
>
> On Feb 9, 2014, at 5:58 AM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > criteria 4.1.1 [1] parsing, requires complete start and end tags for all
> elements.
> >
> > "In content implemented using markup languages, elements have complete
> start and end tags"
> >
> > in HTML end tags certain end tags are optional [2] and certain elements
> have no end tags (<img>, <input> etc.) How do we explain/reconcile this
> disparity?
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#ensure-compat
> >
> > [2]
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/syntax.html#syntax-tag-omission
> :
> > --
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > SteveF
> > HTML 5.1
>
>

Received on Sunday, 9 February 2014 15:20:50 UTC