- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:19:21 +0100
- To: Aaron M Leventhal <aleventh@us.ibm.com>
- CC: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, wai-xtech-request@w3.org, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, www-validator@w3.org, hsivonen@iki.fi
Aaron M Leventhal wrote: > W3C can use a multi-pronged solution: > 1. Short term: create new DTD and ask W3C to host it. It can be > considered "beta" for now. It needs to include HTML 4 + tabindex > changes (allow negative numbers and on any element) + WAI-ARIA. The prose of HTML 4.01 is explicit as to the values allowed. A DTD claiming to be HTML 4.01 should not add laxness to allow additional non-conforming values to be valid. > 3. Long term: W3C needs to develop a strategy around what validation > really means in the age of dynamic content. Getting around validation > by inserting content via script is happening. I'm seeing developers > recommend that ARIA is inserted dynamically onload, just for that > reason. Seems not to be useful. This has been happening for as long as I've been involved in the WWW (over a decade). Validation is a tool, if authors don't use it properly, they aren't going to get its benefits. It's their loss more than anyone else's. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 12:20:18 UTC