W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Action Item: 3.3 Proposal (Writing Style)

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 06:47:34 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Cc: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough), w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

	I'm not sure on this, but I think material needs to be published, or at
least completed before it is copyrighted, so content that is being worked
on to include in a page, is not yet copyrighted. And, it would be best if
it were copyrighted at an average reading level. Content that presumes
pre-knowledge isn't exempt from requiring an average reading level, and
it's no more difficult to do than any other content. Poetry can be treated
as a "quote", and sarcasm is either readable and understandable, or it
fails, so it can be included under the content that must be understandable
to be accessible. 


At 07:00 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>At 05:12 PM 3/12/2001 , Anne Pemberton wrote:
>>         A stab at it ....
>>                 Unless the content is quoted or copyrighted, it should
be readable by the
>>"average" user as defined by the newspaper/news media (to cover listening)
>>... which is sorta about 6th - 8th grade level ... 
>All material is copyrighted. :)  This rewrite proposal fails
>immediately on those grounds.
>Also, you completely ignore the technical aspects required by
>some writing -- you made no exception for works that require
>specific pre-knowledge.
>Finally, you don't address how to handle works that are SPECIFICALLY
>meant to be unclear, such as poetry or sarcasm.
>Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
>Technical Developer Liaison
>Reef North America
>Tel +1 949-567-7006
Anne Pemberton

Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2001 06:43:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC