- From: Mark Gristock <mark.gristock@jkd.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 14:03:26 +0100
- To: "Jamal Mazrui" <Jamal.Mazrui@fcc.gov>, "David Poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- Cc: "Wendy Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>, "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-IG" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
But surely the only accessibility test that actually matters in the end is the user one? Tools are useful in validating work. Each tool has individual strengths and weaknesses - but they aren't what accessibility is about. Nobody got involved in the WAI because they wanted to build sites that passed tests. They want people to be able to use them. The search for a holy grail tool that ticks all the boxes is impossible because the very service is people based. That's why it's accessibility, not validation. _____________________________________________________________________ VirusChecked for Huntsworth plc _____________________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2005 13:04:34 UTC