Re: W3C User Agent Teleconference for 4 May 2006

Jim,

My tool flags invalid code such as missing doc type, depricated  
features and the like.  I was just trying to make a case for a  
perfect score if there is one.  John's point about firefox is on the  
right track.

On May 2, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Jim Allan wrote:

what is the context for this validation? It is not required by WCAG  
2.0 or
by UAAG 1.0. User agents are not validating by nature or function.   
If they
were, the web would come to a crashing halt. Validating code is an  
authoring
responsibility and is voluntary. Tools can create valid code, but  
servers
will serve up whatever matches the filename requested, regardless of
validity of the code. Browsers will attempt to display/render (and  
repair)
whatever is served, regardless of the validity. Unless things change
dramatically, for the foreseeable future, I think user agents will  
remain
bugward compatible just to deal with tremendous amount of non-valid
including misuse of proper vocabulary and use of deprecated code.

There are accessibility features that are required for valid code,  
such as
the 'alt' attribute being required for html 4.01 and xhtml 1.0 that  
provide
some benefit. There must be a value for 'alt', but is that  
information of
any use.  even validity has its limitations. It still up to the  
author to
provide useful information, and hopefully in a valid way.

Having run this around in my head, I am not sure of your point.  
Please help
me understand...

-----Original Message-----
From: David Poehlman [mailto:david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:10 AM
To: Jim Allan
Cc: Jim Allan; WAU-ua; Jan Richards
Subject: Re: W3C User Agent Teleconference for 4 May 2006


If you use depricated features, you cannot vallidate to published
grammars / current specifications.  How does deprication impact
accessibility?  ? For Instance, if I use border in html, I cannot
validate since it's been depricated.  How does this benefit us?

On May 2, 2006, at 9:05 AM, Jim Allan wrote:


what about validation?

Jim Allan, Webmaster & Statewide Technical Support Specialist
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9264  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
---> Share to Win!! <---

-----Original Message-----
From: David Poehlman [mailto:david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 7:50 AM
To: Jim Allan
Cc: WAU-ua; Jan Richards
Subject: Re: W3C User Agent Teleconference for 4 May 2006


anybody got a cattle prod to tickle me with around 1:55pm edt?

I wonder if we should discuss the effects of vallidation on user agents?

On May 2, 2006, at 8:50 AM, Jim Allan wrote:


W3C User Agent Teleconference for  4 May 2006
-------------------------------------------------------------
Chair: Jim Allan
Date: Thursday,  27 April 2006
Time: 2:00-3:00 pm Boston Local Time, USA (19:00-20:00 UTC/GMT)
Call-in: Zakim bridge at: +1-617-761-6200, code 8294#
IRC: sever: irc.w3.org, port: 6665, channel: #ua.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Please send RSVP or additional agenda items to the list.

Agenda

WCAG 2.0 Related

	1. WCAG 2.0 official last call
		  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/
		review conformance section

	2. Review revision 2 UAAG - WCAG correlation table.
		http://www.tsbvi.edu/technology/uawg/wcag2b.htm


	3. Review UAAG references/dependencies on WCAG 1.0
		http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2006AprJun/0010.html
		where should we go with this?

Jim Allan, Webmaster & Statewide Technical Support Specialist
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9264  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
---> Share to Win!! <---

Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2006 18:44:45 UTC