- From: Ineke van der Maat <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:11:52 +0200
- To: "David MacDonald" <befree@magma.ca>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hoi David, >I wanted valid > code, because that is what the spec calls for. But it didn't make my site > anymore accessible. It was accessible before I validated look http://www.creatiefwebmaatwerk.nl/aatest/ and see how Opera and Firefox place an invalid < (between </tr> and </tbody> differently in the table text John sent yesterday. (code is served as text/html) This might be a serious accessibilityproblem for visitors with learning disabilities and still more when it not a >, but a text or some letters. Perhaps so the meaning of an element can change completely. There is not any control where UAs place this invalid piece of content. How can visitors then get control how they want to see the page?? The error existed because later I cut the </table>tag and pasted it somewhere else, but < did not want to participate in this process and stayed where it already were. I corrected the tag but forgot to remove the lonely <. I noticed it when I tested the page and saw the remarkable difference in the 2 browsers. Valid code sometimes may be a requirement for other level 1 issues like guideline 3.2: Any extreme change of context is implemented in a manner that can be programmatically identified. Invalid code may cause extreme changes of context in some UAs and not in others when invalid code is handled differently. Probably invalid code in deep nested divs make the problem more worse. Also the forgotten </a> Tina referred to yesterday, is a serious problem because links in the text can not be found anymore. I met this kind of terrible error some times and even navigation was not usable, being part of that enormous long link through nearly a whole page of ca. 50 lines. Greetings Ineke van der Maat
Received on Wednesday, 22 June 2005 22:11:49 UTC