Re: Using the terms "normative" and "informative" in EO documents

In the "Understanding" and "How to Meet" documents the terms are 
explained on each use, either directly in the sentence or by a link. On 
the other hand the EO documents don't use these terms as far as I can 
see. I think that it could be useful to use them in in order to explain 
what they mean. But perhaps they can be avoided by using the 
explanation. Rather than

"...the contents of this document are informative (they provide 
guidance), and not normative (they do not set requirements for 
conforming to WCAG 2.0)."

say

"...the contents of this document are provided for guidance, they do not 
set requirements for conforming to WCAG 2.0."

or even

"...the contents of this document are provided for guidance (they are 
informative), they do not set requirements for conforming to WCAG 2.0 
(they are not normative)."

An alternative for "informative" might be "provided for information 
purposes". For normative I can't think of an alternative.

For Spanish speakers the term "normative" would be readily understood I 
think as "norma" is the word for standard (although the foreign import 
"estándar" is widely understood).

If these words are used to avoid ambiguity and are defined precisely 
somewhere (as are "should" and "must") then there should be a reference 
to where they are defined.

regards,

Alan

-- 
Alan Chuter
Departamento de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad
Consultor
Technosite - Grupo Fundosa
Fundación ONCE
Tfno.: 91 121 03 30
Fax: 91 375 70 51
achuter@technosite.es
http://www.technosite.es

Shawn Henry escribió:
> 
> EOWG and others who want to comment,
> 
> Question for discussion on the EOWG mailing list:
> How much should we use the terms "normative" and "informative" in our 
> basic introductory, education, and outreach material related to WCAG and 
> the other WAI technical specifications? Is it good to introduce and 
> reinforce these terms, which are used in the technical documents, in our 
> basic material? Or is it unnecessary to complicate the our basic 
> material with what is to some jargony terminology?
> 
> (Note that WCAG 2.0 itself provides definitions of the terms.)
> 
> Background:
> 
> Last week in discussing "How to Update Your Web Site from WCAG 1.0 to 
> WCAG 2.0", we considered adding these terms in: "The WCAG 2.0 technical 
> standard itself is a stable, normative document that will not change 
> once it is completed. However, Understanding WCAG 2.0 and Techniques for 
> WCAG 2.0 are supporting informative resources that can be updated. As 
> technology develops, they will be enhanced with additional tips, 
> techniques, and best practices." See the next-to-last paragraph in 
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/transition1to2/transition1to2-20081121.html> 
> for how it's formatted and linked.
> 
> Here's an example of not using the actual terms: "Thus with WCAG 2.0, 
> there are extensive supporting materials, which are advisory documents. 
> The WCAG 2.0 guidelines document itself is the only document intended to 
> be a Web standard..." - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/wcag2faq#docs>
> 
> There are several places where we talk about the different types of 
> documents, for example:
> * Overview of WCAG 2.0 Documents (old draft) 
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag20.php>
> * The WCAG 2.0 Documents (old draft) 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/wcag20-docs
> * How WAI Develops Accessibility Guidelines through the W3C Process: 
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/w3c-process.php>
> * WAI-ARIA Overview <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria.php>
> 
> Your thoughts on whether or not we should use "normative" and 
> "informative" in some of these types of EO documents? If some but not 
> all, which?
> 
> Regards,
> ~Shawn
> 
> -----
> Shawn Lawton Henry
> W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> e-mail: shawn@w3.org
> phone: +1.617.395.7664
> about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2008 17:03:29 UTC