W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2010

RE: ATAG2: Glossary wording

From: Boland Jr., Frederick E. <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 20:01:40 -0500
To: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
CC: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C493079665F722@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov>
seems ok..


________________________________________
From: Jan Richards [jan.richards@utoronto.ca]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 4:26 PM
To: Boland Jr., Frederick E.
Cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Subject: Re: ATAG2: Glossary wording

Hi Tim,

How about a shortened version?:


This appendix contains definitions for all of the
significant/important/unfamiliar terms used in the normative parts of
this specification, including terms used in the Conformance section.
Every attempt has been made to find appropriate definitions for these
terms from other sources before introducing new definitions. Terms are
linked from their first usage in a section as well as from any usage in
the normative success criteria. Please consult
http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/ for more information on the role of
definitions in specification quality.

Cheers,
Jan


On 05/03/2010 4:21 PM, Boland Jr., Frederick E. wrote:
> I think it's important to know the origin of normative glossary definitions, and to reuse existing definitions where appropriate and practical.  In fact there is support for this from QA Specification Guidelines Good Practice 10:  Use terms already defined without changing their definition. http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#reuse-terms-gp, and
> Good Practice 9: Define unfamiliar terms in-line and consolidate the definitions in a glossary section.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#define-terms-inline-gp
>
> So I disagree with the proposal to remove (.. the ideas in the text should be contained somewhere.. maybe in techniques or informative text somewhere?)
>
> Tim Boland NIST
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jan Richards
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 2:42 PM
> To: WAI-AUWG List
> Subject: ATAG2: Glossary wording
>
> For working purposes we had been labelling the glossary terms with notes
> in "[ ]" to indicate when certain terms were adapted from WCAG 2.0 etc.
>
> I just want to be clear that for the LC draft this won't appear. Also I
> don't think much is added by the following, so I propose it be removed:
>
> "Except where indicated by "[ ]", the source of these definitions is the
> AUWG, developed with a goal of clarity, detail, understanding, and
> completeness. Every attempt has been made to find appropriate
> definitions for these terms from other sources before such development
> by the AUWG. All these terms are linked at least from their first usage
> in the specification. Terms that have designations of "[ ]" beside them
> are taken from the indicated W3C specifications. Where a definition so
> referenced is not suitable or adequate for the ATAG2.0, it may be
> modified as described herein."
>
> Cheers,
> Jan
>
> --
> (Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
> jan.richards@utoronto.ca | 416-946-7060
>
> Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
> Faculty of Information | University of Toronto
>

--
(Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
jan.richards@utoronto.ca | 416-946-7060

Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
Faculty of Information | University of Toronto
Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 01:02:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 8 March 2010 01:02:45 GMT