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

Re: Wording issues

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@contenu.nu>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:15:25 -0400
Message-Id: <a05100301b7a193139ddf@[]>
To: w3c-wai-gl@W3.org
>  > >           + [35]Checkpoint 1.5 Separate content and structure from
>  > >             presentation.
>  >
>  > "Separate content and structure" can still be read as a noun phrase.
>No it can't be.

I didn't say the rest of the sentence would work with that reading. 
If one errantly reads "separate content and structure" as a noun 
phrase and keeps going through the rest of the sentence, suddenly you 
have to double back to make sense of it.

"Keep content and structure separate from presentation" lacks that problem.

>  >      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.
>The suggested alternative only makes the sentence harder to interpret
>  and resolves no ambiguity.

Oh, give me a break. "Within the bounds of appropriateness for the 
site's content, write as clearly and simply as possible." In a site 
on theoretical physics, that will mean something different from 
MarthaStewart.com, won't it?

There are three subjective criteria at work in this guideline 
(simplicity; clarity; appropriateness) and my wording makes that 
unambiguous. The previous wording will force the group to argue 
endlessly over "appropriate" vs. "appropriately"; mine solves the 
         Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
         Accessibility articles, resources, and critiques:
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2001 11:17:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC