Hi, There is a specific WSG list for CMS matters. Please join and use that list for this discussion.
http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/resource131.cfm for details. P > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Deering > Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 11:48 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [WSG] CMS > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vlad Alexander (XStandard) > > > > Hi Geoff, > > > > >>But still it is no guarantee to maintain the sites > > >>standards compliance when you hand it over to the client > > > > Actually, we are working hard to address this specific > issue. Check out > > http://xstandard.com > > > > Regards, > > -Vlad > > XStandard Development Team > > XHTML Strict / 1.1 WYSIWYG Editor > > Yes, this is good, and many CMS's have similar editors built in; > Cocoon/Lenya and Plone. But one still has to sign off to customer > explicitly stating that if they meddle with the code your warranty of > standards compliance and accessibility is then void. > > The other problem is contracts specifically specifying that > they must comply > with ATAG. I have not seen one yet, but I am sure it is > coming, especially > in government contracts. > > Unfortunately, from the developers side, ATAG is a rather > naive document, I > would never sign a contract that references ATAG compliance. > Why, because > all web based authoring tools must comply with WCAG1 P1. > Show me one decent > one that works with scripting turned off? > > Does xstandard meet this requirement? > > I think this is a reasonable accessibility request for web > sites, but to > deny the type of authoring environments via web forms that > only scripting > can deliver, is putting an almost impossible criteria on this type of > authoring environment. It would mean you could only do > simple processing of > text like wrapping <p> around line breaks. > > If you don't think this is an issue, I have been in > situations where I have > had to comply to the letter of the specifications, and in > some cases write > detailed explanations of our code referencing a series of > templates and show > that that code on deliverable, is standard and accessible. > And I wouldn't > be so naive as to believe that no one will ever sue you for > the holes in > ATAG. It will happen if ATAG is not cleaned up and clarified. > > Geoff > > ***************************************************** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ***************************************************** > ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
