W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: Success Criteria 3.1.5 violates academic freedom on my opinion and could not be practiced by universities.

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:31:19 +0100
Message-ID: <79cab0900801180131k20e00bb9y609ca1b7402f1727@mail.gmail.com>
To: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
I agree that some more universal definition of reading level is
needed. In Spain the system is (or was) divided into three levels, not
just primary and secondary.

I wonder whether the progress of students with no reading disability
really follows the same path as that of those with different
disabilities. People with a reading disability don't always have it
because they haven't learned or are backward.

I agree with (what I think) Wayne argues that this could lead to
material simply being removed from the public space because it can not
be expressed in simple language. if the concepts are advanced,
expressing it in simple language could make it so verbose that the
main target audience suffers from overload or misses its artistic
value. Perhaps this is why it is level three.

On the other hand, not all cultures have a movement towards simple
writing style that has become accepted in English-speaking countries,
and something is needed to make people (like in the country where I
live) realize that unnecessarily complex and long sentences and
rarely-used vocabulary are not a sign of good writing. Something is
needed. Like avoid using unnecessarily complex or obscure language, in
new text. Making the difference between new and existing text.

best regards,


On 18/01/2008, Sylvie duchateau <sylvie.duchateau@snv.jussieu.fr> wrote:
> Hello Wayne and all,
> I have also concerns about this success criterion, as I think, it is
> difficult to evaluate what is the lower secondary education level. I
> wonder if this level is the same in any country. How can this be adapted
> to another country than the US? How is this level specified?
> Best
> Sylvie
> Wayne Dick a écrit :
> >
> > 3.1.5 Reading Level: When text requires reading ability more advanced
> > than the lower secondary education level, supplemental content, or a
> > version  that does not require reading ability more advanced than the
> > lower secondary education level, is available. (Level AAA) How to Meet
> > 3.1.5 Understanding 3.1.5
> >
> > I am not sure that a posting of, poetry, creative writing, philosophy,
> > physics, biochemistry, statistics or mathematics that required first
> > and second year work university work in the given major could be
> > expressed at a lower secondary educational level.  If we adopt this
> > criteria then the instructional materials of advanced courses can
> > never meet Level AAA.  Do we want to create a level that an entire
> > sector cannot meet?
> >
> > I think we should create some exception language like:  unless
> > material cannot be simplified or the intent of the writing is to use
> > language in specific ways.
> >
> > This is dangerously close to censorship, and we never know how it
> > could be used.
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Senior Web Accessibility Consultant, Technosite (www.technosite.es)
Researcher, Inredis Project (www.inredis.es/)
Email: achuter@technosite.es
Alternative email: achuter.technosite@yahoo.com
Blogs: www.blogger.com/profile/09119760634682340619
Received on Friday, 18 January 2008 09:31:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:56 UTC