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

Wording issues

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@contenu.nu>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:30:24 -0400
Message-Id: <a05100329b7a0b4b0230e@[65.92.103.8]>
To: w3c-wai-gl@W3.org
In the current draft:

>           + [32]Checkpoint 1.2 Provide synchronized media equivalents
>             with time-dependent presentations.

What you likely mean to say:

	When using time-dependent presentations,
	provide synchronized media equivalents.

Unambiguous.

What you presently have can be interpreted as:

	In every page and without exception, add the following:
	time-dependent presentations with synchronized
	media equivalents.

>           + [35]Checkpoint 1.5 Separate content and structure from
>             presentation.

"Separate content and structure" can still be read as a noun phrase. 
("Separate" and "separate" are homographs: same spelling, different 
pronunciation.)

	Keep content and structure separate from presentation

is unambiguous.

>           + [40]Checkpoint 2.4 Either give users control over how long
>             they can interact with content that requires a timed response
>             or give them as much time as possible.

I don't see how the last part makes any sense. "As much time as 
possible" can easily mean "no time limit," which nullifies the entire 
premise. Or a designer may get all huffy and say "Well, *I* think 
it's possible to respond within five seconds, so that's all anybody's 
getting." One person's possibility is another person's impossibility.

I think you really mean:

	When content requires a timed response,
	either give the user control over how long
	they can interact with the content
	or give them as much time as possible.

But I really think you *mean* to say "It is preferable never to 
require a timed response."

>           + [47]Checkpoint 3.3 Write as clearly and simply as is possible
>             and appropriate for the site's content.

Or:

	Write as clearly and simply as possible
	in a way that is appropriate for the site's content.

You'll spend the rest of your lives arguing over whether or not 
"appropriate" is an adverb (indicative of the level of help WCAG 
needs with writing). This way there is no such debate.

>           + [48]Checkpoint 3.4 Supplement text with non-text content.

*wherever possible*.
-- 
         Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
         Accessibility articles, resources, and critiques:
         <http://joeclark.org/access/>
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2001 19:33:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:11 GMT