W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: mode of examples [imperative?] and plain-ish English vs. spec-ese

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 10:28:28 +1000 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10004251017110.15731-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
As I mentioned at the last meeting, apart from clarifying exactly what is
normative in the guidelines, we also need to ensure that dependencies
among the requirements are identified and made explicit. The existing
cross references are a suitable starting point, but we need to consider
how the interrelationships among the guidelines and checkpoints could be
most clearly expressed. For example, as Al mentioned, some
cross-references are merely informative; others, however, are supposed to
indicate that one requirement is to operate as a qualification or
limitation upon another. These distinctions need to be apparent to readers
of the document, and not just to this working group.

One could write, for instance:
"Subject to checkpoint 5.3...", or "except as provided in checkpoints xx
and y...", which would be sufficiently plain for most purposes, even
though one could accuse the writing style of being quasi-legal in
character. In the end, however, content developers, authoring tool
implementors, other WAI working groups and those responsible for the
establishment and enforcement of relevant policies, are entitled to insist
on this degree of precision.

Note: the foregoing comments are made in my personal capacity.
Received on Monday, 24 April 2000 20:29:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:04 GMT