W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > March 1999

Re: page and site complexity measures [was Re: Web Content Acc

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 09:17:07 -0500
Message-Id: <199903041414.JAA1084910@relay.interim.iamworld.net>
To: "Silas S. Brown" <ssb22@cam.ac.uk>, "jonathan chetwynd" <jonathan@signbrowser.free-online.co.uk>, jay@peepo.com
Cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
At 09:38 AM 3/4/99 +0000, Silas S. Brown wrote:

>I think the best test of "is a page easy to understand" is to try it out 
>on someone.

Let me describe my experience with the grammar checker in Microsoft Word.
Most of the time I don't use it.  But as you may have noticed, I do have a
great capability to write things that are hard to understand.  When I do
use the grammar checker, I find that the majority of warnings are things
that I ignore.  On the other hand, I feel that the minority of warnings
where I go back and re-write are valuable enough so that using the checker
was worth the time I put into it.  The tool helps me find gratuitous
roadblocks I have left in the reader's way.

It is a lot like Bobby.  The _best_ test of "is a page accessible" is to
try it out on someone, but I would not want to waste people's time doing
live evaluations of sites that had not been Bobby-checked first.  

Received on Thursday, 4 March 1999 09:22:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:28 UTC