- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:29:39 -0600
- To: 'Al Gilman' <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>, w3c-wai-cg@w3.org
- Cc: wai-uaag-editor@w3.org, "'Ian B. Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>
Pretty good One other place to cite would have been http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/12/change-summary#Validity Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-cg-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-wai-cg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Al Gilman > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:56 AM > To: w3c-wai-cg@w3.org > Cc: wai-uaag-editor@w3.org; Ian B. Jacobs > Subject: [FYI] Is there a better answer? [was: Re: > Accesibility Validaytor] > > > Ian got hit with this random public question. > > Owing to history, he bounced it to UAAG. > > I'm not sure if EO, EOT, or WCAG should take the lead on an > answer to a question like this, but the question seems to be > about accessibility rating/claims for content, not browsers. > In other words, not UAAG. > > Rather than leave the question in bureaucratic limbo bouncing > around from desk to desk, I invested 15 minutes or so in some > Googling and came up with the answer below. > > archived at: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Dec/0039.html > > Anybody aware that we have a better answer, please jump in, > write to the questioner and let us know you did. > > Al > > PS: I'm pretty sure this is a question we get, and will get, often. > > PPS: .. and another 15 minutes or so in this process cleanup. > > At 8:27 AM -0600 14 12 2007, Ian B. Jacobs wrote: > >Hello, > > > >I have forwarded your question to my WAI colleagues; I am no longer > >actively involved in the project. > > Gokhan, > > Please look over: > > Understanding levels of conformance: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20071211/con > formance.html#uc-levels-head > > .. as linked from > > WCAG20 Layers of Guidance > http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#intro-layers-guidance > > .. and > Conformance Evaluation of Web Sites for Accessibility > http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/conformance.html > > Hope this helps. > > Al > > > > >Thank you, > > > > _ Ian > > > >On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 10:28 +0200, Gokhan Arzi wrote: > >> Dear W3C, > >> > >> > >> > >> We have a few questions regarding W3C accessibility. > >> > >> > >> > >> - Do you separate the rules like essentials and optionals? > >> > >> - Can we say that we are Accesibility compatible, if > >> validators do not generate errors? > >> > >> - In order to have an "accessible" content and > clean codes, > >> should all errors and warnings be fixed? > >> > >> > >> > >> These questions are really crucial for us. > >> > >> > >> > >> Hope to hear from you soon. > >> > >> > >> > >> Best regards. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Gökhan ARZI™ > >> > >> Web Developer > >> > >> > >> nexum creative > >> > >> Head Office: Maslak Meydan Sok.Spring Giz Plaza > >> Kat: 14 80670 Maslak / I™stanbul > >> Tel : + 90 212 328 19 29 > >> Fax: + 90 212 328 19 33 > >> e-mail: g.arzi@nexumcreative.com > >> > >> www.nexumcreative.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >-- > >Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ > >Tel: +1 718 260-9447 > > > > > >Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc > >Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part > > > >Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:signature 510.asc ( / > ) (0019FC27) > > >
Received on Friday, 14 December 2007 17:30:05 UTC