- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2006 11:23:44 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Terry Dean wrote: > So what you are saying is that its ok > to do this sort of thing as long as it conforms to priority 1? I'm just answering your question with regards to their WCAG claim. They effectively claim level A, and I'm telling you that valid code is not a requirement of level A. Of course there's no point in claiming that you're using valid HTML/CSS as well, but that's another topic and not your original question, which seemed solely concerned with the accessibility claim (also because you asked on the WAI IG list). Whether it makes sense to declare a doctype and say that pages validate against HTML/CSS spec when they don't is another matter, and one that is off topic for this particular list unless they're claiming AA or higher. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __________________________________________________________ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __________________________________________________________
Received on Sunday, 3 September 2006 10:23:46 UTC