Thread Subject: Valid and well-formed code
Note
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Andi Snow-Weaver
Date: Fri, Mar 30 2007 2:45 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Smith, Jamie: "Re: Valid and well-formed code"
- Previous message in thread: Smith, Jamie: "Web Gap: Valid and Well-formed Code"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
We discussed the idea of adding a provision in 1194.22 on valid and
well-formed code but did not come to consensus on it. [1] There was some
opposition to the WCAG 2.0 wording which used the phrase "parsed
unambiguously" and was viewed to be hard to understand.
This week, the WCAG working group came up with the following more
understandable wording for this requirement:
"Web pages created using markup languages have elements with complete start
and end tags except as allowed by the specification and are nested
according to specification."
Should we add this to our draft? [2]
[1]
http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_Web_Gaps#Valid_and_Well-formed_Code
[2] http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_Web_Like_WCAG_2_0
Andi
- Next message in Thread: Smith, Jamie: "Re: Valid and well-formed code"
- Previous message in Thread: Smith, Jamie: "Web Gap: Valid and Well-formed Code"
WebAIM is an initiative of:
