WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Illinois Functional Web Accessibility Evaluator: Sign up for free user acount

for

From: Jon Gunderson
Date: Jan 23, 2007 9:50PM

In general most HTML validators require character encoding and the test is basically checking to see if the 3 elements needed for validation are present:

1. DOCTYPE
2. Character encoding information
3. Language specification

If these elements are present the author is more likely validating their web resources. If they are missing the author is probably not validating their resources.

Jon


---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:05:18 -0500
>From: "Robert Yonaitis" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Illinois Functional Web Accessibility Evaluator: Sign up for free user acount
>To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>
>Hello All:
>
>On Headers: of course headers are used for many different things and not
>excluding static pages. From encoding, Privacy, Session, P3P, meta
>information of all types, are we saying that we need to consider all
>information in our headers as needed to be duplicated? Should we have to
>save our P3P file to a P3P xml?
>
>Can we assume if a user is saving a page that they are OK with the
>encoding, privacy and any other information and the duplication should
>not be required and if we are recommending this are you recommending
>this for only static pages or not just static but for both
>static/dynamic and web applications. I ask this because, as we all know,
>a developer will ask Why?!? do I need to duplicate "widely accepted
>method of using http headers" in my application which can present a
>whole set of issues for the <meta approach.
>
>Perhaps this is where a tool needs to be able to Read the value it is
>looking for in the header or in the meta information and grade it
>correctly versus saying that it fails because it does not read the
>header? JUST ASKING HERE.
>
>Is there a set of test cases that the tool was developed against or a
>logic case/use case for us to look at. I would be curious to see it!
>
>Thank you all!
>
>-Rob Yonaitis
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
>[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Patrick H.
>Lauke
>Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:54 PM
>To: WebAIM Discussion List
>Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Illinois Functional Web Accessibility Evaluator:
>Sign up for free user acount
>
>Michael D. Roush wrote:
>
>> Should I be using both the character encoding in the http header and
>> in a <meta> tag? Should I remove the one set in the http header? Or
>> should FAE allow the absence of the <meta> tag if the character
>> encoding is set in the header?
>
>I think an issue would arise once a user saves a page locally and
>re-accesses it...in the absence of the header, in that case, the <meta>
>is the only authoritive clue as to what encoding the page has.
>
>So yes, I'd say use both.
>
>P
>--
>Patrick H. Lauke
>