Edit comment LC-910 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to LC-463 LC-464 LC-465 LC-466 LC-467 LC-469 LC-470 LC-472 LC-473 LC-474 LC-475 LC-476 LC-481 LC-482 LC-483 LC-484 LC-485 LC-486 LC-487 LC-488 LC-489 LC-490 LC-491 LC-492 LC-493 LC-494 LC-495 LC-496 LC-497 LC-498 LC-499 LC-500 LC-501 LC-502 LC-503 LC-504 LC-505 LC-506 LC-507 LC-509 LC-510 LC-511 LC-512 LC-513 LC-514 LC-515 LC-516 LC-525 LC-526 LC-527 LC-528 LC-529 LC-530 LC-531 LC-532 LC-533 LC-534 LC-535 LC-536 LC-537 LC-538 LC-539 LC-540 LC-543 LC-544 LC-545 LC-558 LC-562 LC-563 LC-564 LC-565 LC-566 LC-567 LC-568 LC-569 LC-570 LC-571 LC-572 LC-573 LC-574 LC-580 LC-581 LC-582 LC-583 LC-584 LC-585 LC-586 LC-587 LC-588 LC-590 LC-598 LC-599 LC-601 LC-602 LC-603 LC-604 LC-605 LC-606 LC-607 LC-608 LC-609 LC-610 LC-611 LC-612 LC-613 LC-614 LC-615 LC-616 LC-617 LC-618 LC-619 LC-620 LC-621 LC-622 LC-623 LC-624 LC-625 LC-626 LC-627 LC-628 LC-629 LC-630 LC-631 LC-632 LC-633 LC-634 LC-635 LC-636 LC-637 LC-638 LC-639 LC-640 LC-641 LC-642 LC-643 LC-644 LC-646 LC-647 LC-648 LC-649 LC-651 LC-652 LC-653 LC-658 LC-659 LC-662 LC-663 LC-664 LC-681 LC-683 LC-684 LC-685 LC-686 LC-687 LC-689 LC-691 LC-692 LC-693 LC-694 LC-696 LC-697 LC-708 LC-712 LC-713 LC-714 LC-715 LC-716 LC-718 LC-719 LC-720 LC-721 LC-722 LC-723 LC-724 LC-725 LC-726 LC-727 LC-728 LC-729 LC-730 LC-731 LC-732 LC-733 LC-734 LC-735 LC-736 LC-737 LC-738 LC-739 LC-740 LC-741 LC-742 LC-743 LC-744 LC-745 LC-746 LC-748 LC-749 LC-750 LC-751 LC-752 LC-754 LC-755 LC-756 LC-757 LC-758 LC-759 LC-760 LC-762 LC-799 LC-800 LC-801 LC-803 LC-805 LC-806 LC-807 LC-808 LC-809 LC-810 LC-811 LC-812 LC-813 LC-814 LC-815 LC-816 LC-817 LC-818 LC-819 LC-820 LC-829 LC-830 LC-831 LC-832 LC-835 LC-836 LC-837 LC-838 LC-839 LC-840 LC-841 LC-842 LC-843 LC-844 LC-845 LC-846 LC-847 LC-848 LC-849 LC-850 LC-851 LC-852 LC-853 LC-854 LC-855 LC-856 LC-857 LC-858 LC-859 LC-860 LC-861 LC-862 LC-863 LC-864 LC-865 LC-866 LC-867 LC-868 LC-869 LC-870 LC-871 LC-872 LC-873 LC-874 LC-875 LC-876 LC-877 LC-878 LC-879 LC-880 LC-881 LC-882 LC-883 LC-884 LC-885 LC-886 LC-887 LC-888 LC-889 LC-890 LC-891 LC-892 LC-893 LC-894 LC-895 LC-896 LC-897 LC-898 LC-899 LC-900 LC-902 LC-903 LC-904 LC-905 LC-906 LC-907 LC-908 LC-909 LC-910 LC-911 LC-912 LC-913 LC-914 LC-915 LC-916 LC-917 LC-918 LC-919 LC-920 LC-921 LC-922 LC-923 LC-924 LC-925 LC-926 LC-927 LC-928 LC-929 LC-930 LC-931 LC-932 LC-933 LC-934 LC-935 LC-936 LC-939 LC-940 LC-941 LC-942 LC-944 LC-945 LC-946 LC-947 LC-949 LC-950 LC-951 LC-952 LC-953 LC-954 LC-955 LC-956 LC-958 LC-959 LC-960 LC-961 LC-962 LC-963 LC-965 LC-966 LC-967 LC-968 LC-969 LC-970 LC-971 LC-972 LC-973 LC-974 LC-976 LC-977 LC-978 LC-979 LC-981 LC-982 LC-983 LC-984 LC-987 LC-988 LC-989 LC-990 LC-991 LC-993 LC-994 LC-995 LC-996 LC-997 LC-998 LC-999 LC-1000 LC-1001 LC-1002 LC-1003 LC-1004 LC-1005 LC-1006 LC-1007 LC-1008 LC-1009 LC-1010 LC-1011 LC-1012 LC-1013 LC-1014 LC-1020 LC-1021 LC-1022 LC-1023 LC-1024 LC-1026 LC-1027 LC-1028 LC-1029 LC-1030 LC-1031 LC-1032 LC-1033 LC-1034 LC-1035 LC-1036 LC-1037 LC-1038 LC-1039 LC-1040 LC-1041 LC-1042 LC-1043 LC-1044 LC-1045 LC-1046 LC-1047 LC-1048 LC-1049 LC-1051 LC-1052 LC-1053 LC-1054 LC-1056 LC-1057 LC-1058 LC-1059 LC-1060 LC-1061 LC-1062 LC-1063 LC-1064 LC-1065 LC-1066 LC-1067 LC-1068 LC-1069 LC-1070 LC-1071 LC-1085 LC-1096 LC-1097 LC-1098 LC-1141 LC-1142 LC-1143 LC-1144 LC-1145 LC-1148 LC-1149 LC-1150 LC-1151 LC-1152 LC-1153 LC-1154 LC-1155 LC-1156 LC-1157 LC-1158 LC-1159 LC-1160 LC-1161 LC-1162 LC-1163 LC-1164 LC-1165 LC-1166 LC-1167 LC-1168 LC-1169 LC-1170 LC-1171 LC-1172 LC-1173 LC-1174 LC-1175 LC-1176 LC-1177 LC-1178 LC-1179 LC-1180 LC-1181 LC-1182 LC-1183 LC-1184 LC-1185 LC-1186 LC-1187 LC-1188 LC-1189 LC-1191 LC-1192 LC-1193 LC-1194 LC-1195 LC-1196 LC-1197 LC-1198 LC-1199 LC-1200 LC-1201 LC-1202 LC-1203 LC-1204 LC-1205 LC-1206 LC-1207 LC-1208 LC-1209 LC-1210 LC-1211 LC-1212 LC-1213 LC-1214 LC-1215 LC-1216 LC-1217 LC-1218 LC-1219 LC-1220 LC-1221 LC-1222 LC-1223 LC-1224 LC-1225 LC-1226 LC-1227 LC-1228 LC-1229 LC-1230 LC-1231 LC-1232 LC-1233 LC-1234 LC-1235 LC-1236 LC-1237 LC-1238 LC-1239 LC-1240 LC-1241 LC-1242 LC-1243 LC-1244 LC-1245 LC-1246 LC-1247 LC-1248 LC-1249 LC-1250 LC-1251 LC-1252 LC-1253 LC-1254 LC-1255 LC-1256 LC-1257 LC-1258 LC-1259 LC-1261 LC-1262 LC-1263 LC-1264 LC-1265 LC-1266 LC-1267 LC-1268 LC-1269 LC-1270 LC-1271 LC-1272 LC-1273 LC-1274 LC-1275 LC-1277 LC-1278 LC-1279 LC-1280 LC-1281 LC-1282 LC-1283 LC-1284 LC-1285 LC-1286 LC-1287 LC-1288 LC-1289 LC-1290 LC-1291 LC-1292 LC-1293 LC-1294 LC-1295 LC-1296 LC-1297 LC-1298 LC-1299 LC-1300 LC-1301 LC-1302 LC-1303 LC-1304 LC-1305 LC-1306 LC-1307 LC-1309 LC-1310 LC-1311 LC-1312 LC-1313 LC-1314 LC-1315 LC-1316 LC-1317 LC-1318 LC-1319 LC-1320 LC-1321 LC-1322 LC-1323 LC-1324 LC-1325 LC-1328 LC-1329 LC-1330 LC-1331 LC-1332 LC-1370 LC-1371 LC-1372 LC-1408 LC-1409 LC-1410 LC-1411 LC-1412 LC-1413 LC-1414 LC-1423 LC-1427 LC-1437 LC-1442 LC-1446 LC-1449 LC-1450 LC-1470 LC-1471 LC-1488 LC-1489 LC-1490 LC-1491 LC-1492 LC-1493 LC-1494 LC-1495 LC-1496 LC-1497 LC-1498 LC-1499 LC-1500 LC-1501 LC-1502 LC-1503 LC-1504 LC-1505 LC-1506 LC-1507 LC-1508 LC-1509 LC-1510 LC-1511 LC-1517 LC-1524 LC-1531 LC-1536 LC-1562 LC-1657 LC-1665 LC-2609 LC-2750 LC-2751 LC-2752 LC-2753 LC-2754 LC-2755 LC-2756

Comment LC-910

Comment Shortname:

Commenter: Giorgio Brajnik <giorgio@dimi.uniud.it> on behalf of University of Udine, Italy

Message-id:

Section of the document concerned:

[Free text description]Document as a wholeIntroduction Related Documents Authoring tools The Role of User Agents The Four Principles of Accessibility Important New Terms Used in WCAG 2.0 Conformance Technology assumptions and the "baseline" Conformance levels and the baseline Conformance claims Content that conforms to WCAG 1.0 How to refer to WCAG 2.0 from other documents Guideline 1.1 Success Criterion 1.1.1 Guideline 1.2 Success Criterion 1.2.1 Success Criterion 1.2.2 Success Criterion 1.2.3 Success Criterion 1.2.4 Success Criterion 1.2.5 Success Criterion 1.2.6 Success Criterion 1.2.7 Guideline 1.3 Success Criterion 1.3.1 Success Criterion 1.3.2 Success Criterion 1.3.3 Success Criterion 1.3.4 Success Criterion 1.3.5 Guideline 1.4 Success Criterion 1.4.1 Success Criterion 1.4.2 Success Criterion 1.4.3 Success Criterion 1.4.4 Guideline 2.1 Success Criterion 2.1.1 Success Criterion 2.1.2 Guideline 2.2 Success Criterion 2.2.1 Success Criterion 2.2.2 Success Criterion 2.2.3 Success Criterion 2.2.4 Success Criterion 2.2.5 Success Criterion 2.2.6 Guideline 2.3 Success Criterion 2.3.1 Success Criterion 2.3.2 Guideline 2.4 Success Criterion 2.4.1 Success Criterion 2.4.2 Success Criterion 2.4.3 Success Criterion 2.4.4 Success Criterion 2.4.5 Success Criterion 2.4.6 Success Criterion 2.4.7 Success Criterion 2.4.8 Guideline 2.5 Success Criterion 2.5.1 Success Criterion 2.5.2 Success Criterion 2.5.3 Success Criterion 2.5.4 Guideline 3.1 Success Criterion 3.1.1 Success Criterion 3.1.2 Success Criterion 3.1.3 Success Criterion 3.1.4 Success Criterion 3.1.5 Success Criterion 3.1.6 Guideline 3.2 Success Criterion 3.2.1 Success Criterion 3.2.2 Success Criterion 3.2.3 Success Criterion 3.2.4 Success Criterion 3.2.5 Guideline 4.1 Success Criterion 4.1.1 Success Criterion 4.1.2 Guideline 4.2 Success Criterion 4.2.1 Success Criterion 4.2.2 Success Criterion 4.2.3 Success Criterion 4.2.4 Appendix A: Glossary Appendix B: Checklist Appendix C: Acknowledgements Appendix D: Comparison of WCAG 1.0 checkpoints to WCAG 2.0 Appendix E: References
or

Refinement of the section concerned:

Status:

open proposal pending resolved_yes resolved_no resolved_partial other assigned to Nobody Abma, Jake Abou-Zahra, Shadi Allan, Jim Auclair, Christopher Avila, Jonathan Babinszki, Tom Bailey, Bruce Bernard, Renaldo Bernier, Alex Blake, Matthew Boudreau, Denis Brewer, Judy Butler, Shari Campbell, Alastair Carlson, Laura Chakravarthula, Srinivasu Cirrincione, Pietro Conway, Vivienne Cooper, Michael Crutchfield, Elizabeth Deltour, Romain Dick, Wayne Ding, Chaohai Dirks, Kim Dixit, Shwetank Draffan, E.A. Duggin, Alistair Eggert, Eric Elledge, Michael Faulkner, Steve Ferraz, Reinaldo Fiers, Wilco Fischer, Detlev Foliot, John Garrish, Matt Garrison, Alistair Gower, Michael Guarino Reid, Loretta Hakkinen, Markku Haritos-Shea, Katie Henry, Shawn Hoffmann, Thomas Horton, Sarah Isager, Kasper Jensen, Tobias Christian Johansson, Stefan Johlic, Marc Johnson, Rick Jones, Crystal Joys Andersen, Wilhelm Kapoor, Shilpi Keim, Oliver Kirkpatrick, Andrew Kirkwood, John Kiss, Jason Kraft, Maureen Ku, JaEun Kurapati, Sujasree Lauke, Patrick Lauriat, Shawn Lee, Steve Lemon, Gez Li, Alex Li, Kepeng Li, Liangcheng Loiselle, Chris Lowney, Greg Lui, Edwina Lund, Adam Ma, Jia MacDonald, David Mace, Amanda Manser, Erich Martin, Debra McCormack, Scott McMeeking, Chris McSorley, Jan Milliken, Neil Montgomery, Rachael Mueller, Mary Jo nicole, windmann Niemann, Gundula Nurthen, James O Connor, Joshue Oh, Jeong-Hun Panchang, Sailesh Pandhi, Charu Pasi, Aparna Patch, Kimberly Philipp, Melanie Pluke, Mike Pouncey, Ian Repsher, Stephen Rochford, John Runyan, Marla Savva, Andreas Sawczyn, Steve Schnabel, Stefan Seeman-Kestenbaum, Lisa Sims, Glenda Singh, Avneesh Skotkjerra, Stein Erik Sloan, David Smith, Alan Smith, Jim Solomon, Adam Spellman, Jeanne F Strobbe, Christophe Suprock, Greg Swallow, David Thompson, Kenneth Thyme, Anne Ueki, Makoto Vaishnav, Jatin Vanderheiden, Gregg Venkata, Manoj Wahlbin, Kathleen Wang, Can WANG, WEI White, Jason Zelmanowicz, Erica Zerner, Adam Zhang, Mengni

Type: substantive editorial typo question general comment undefined

Resolution status:

Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter

Response status:

No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):

Comment:

it is not that the content can be parsed unambiguosly or not. That is a property of the language, not of the processor of the language. If the language is ambiguous then a parser could take arbitrary decisions in interpreting the sentences. Like Italian. HTML, not even 2.0, was never ambiguous. And if user agents were strict since the beginning, web authors would have never been allowed to write incorrect html.

Proposed Change:

what 411 should say is that authors should write syntactically correct code, which is what the techniques say.

Related issues: 486 544 748 809 866 874 910 927 1063 1172 1233 1320
(space separated ids)

WG Notes: [TEAMC] 3/12/07: Note for How to Meet: this maps to the idea of "well formed" in XML (consequently XHTML), but is intended to be generic to other declarative languages, such as HTML and PDF. The ID uniqueness is the one semantic rule (as opposed to syntactic) that we wanted to include, because of the dependence on that from many other techniques such as labeling, table headings, etc. Discussed in the 15 March 2007 telecon: No resolution, sent back to subgroup. http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/03/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html Discussed in the 29 March 2007 telecon: Resolution: close 4.1.1 issues with proposal as amended http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/03/29-wai-wcag-minutes.html {partial accept} DONE Change SC 4.1.1 to : "Content implemented using markup languages has elements with complete start and end tags, except as allowed by their specifications, and are nested according to their specifications." Note: Start and end tags that are missing a critical character in their formation, such as a closing angle bracket or a mismatched attribute value quote are not complete. DONE revise intent of 4.1.1 to read: (DONE review this for accuracy given changes to SC) The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that user agents, including assistive technology, can accurately interpret and parse content. If the content cannot be parsed into a data structure, then different user agents may present it differently or be completely unable to parse it. Some user agents use "repair techniques" to render poorly coded content. Since repair techniques vary among user agents, authors can not assume that content will be accurately parsed into a data structure or that it will be rendered correctly by specialized user agents, including assistive technologies, unless the content us created according to the rules defined in the formal grammar for that technology. Therefore, the success criterion requires that the content can be parsed using only the rules of the formal grammar. DONE delete F28 DONE move F17 and F62 to 1.3.1 DONE replace the word "unambiguously" with "without error" in sufficient tech #3 in 4.1.1 and from first benefit DONE Add new failure to 4.1.1, "Failure of 4.1.1 due to incorrect use of start and end tags or attribute markup" (HTML) (e.g. start and end tags that not broken due to missing a critical character in its formation, such as a closing angle bracket or a mismatched attribute value quote) Internal WD updated 02 April 2007.

Resolution: To make this requirement easier to understand, we have reworded SC 4.1.1 to clarify that it must be possible to parse content without the need for user agent repair. The revised SC reads as follows: 4.1.1 Content implemented using markup languages has elements with complete start and end tags, except as allowed by their specifications, and are nested according to their specifications. (Level A) Note: Start and end tags that are missing a critical character in their formation, such as a closing angle bracket or a mismatched attribute value quote are not complete.

(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)