This document:Public document·View comments·Disposition of Comments·
Nearby:Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Other specs in this tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group's Issue tracker
Quick access to LC-2582 LC-2583 LC-2584 LC-2595 LC-2596 LC-2601 LC-2605 LC-2610 LC-2611 LC-2612 LC-2613 LC-2619 LC-2620 LC-2622 LC-2625 LC-2626 LC-2627 LC-2628 LC-2631 LC-2632 LC-2646 LC-2647 LC-2648 LC-2683 LC-2684 LC-2703 LC-2704 LC-2718 LC-2719 LC-2723 LC-2724 LC-2726 LC-2728 LC-2729 LC-2730 LC-2745 LC-2770 LC-2771 LC-2773
Previous: LC-2611 Next: LC-2583
The test includes this check: 2.Check that appropriate semantic markup (such as em, strong, cite, blockquote, quote, sub, and sup) have been used to mark the text that conveys information through variations in text. Proposed Change: quote should be removed since it is not an element. Since screen reader support is poor and IE6 and 7 require CSS hacks to add quotes to q it may be better not to refer to q at all at the time being. After all, there seems to be consensus that inline quotes may also be indicated by using "..." so failing to use the q element should not fail the test. Another question is whether there is a solid base right now to distinguish between proper and improper uses of the elements <i> and <b> which used to me presentational but are being given new semantics in HTML 5. The same is true for <cite> which is now likely to be restricted to titles in HTML5. The test of those elements would either require a check of doctype to differentiate between, and describe, legitimate usages, or not explicitly mention these elements so it is down to the evaluator to work out whether usage conforms to the chosen doctype.