- From: Jon Ribbens <jon+www-validator@unequivocal.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:39:11 +0100
- To: Terry Dean <Terry.Dean@chariot.net.au>
- Cc: 'David Dorward' <david@dorward.me.uk>, www-validator@w3.org
Terry Dean <Terry.Dean@chariot.net.au> wrote: > But my question is specifically aimed at whether valid XHTML 1.0 > Transitional code is acceptable for accessibility standards or are you > saying that unless you use XHTML 1.0 Strict! or HTML 4.01 Strict! that we > should not be claiming conformance with regards to accessibility (here again > I accept that validation alone is not the only requirement). The > specifications appear to be ambiguous to me, the word Transitional implies > that it is an interim solution designed for backwards compatibility or > legacy browsers. If you wish to claim compliance with the WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Priority 2 Checkpoints, you are unambiguously required to comply with the requirements of the Strict DTDs - see Checkpoint 11.2 "Avoid deprecated features of W3C technologies".
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2005 17:39:15 UTC