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

Re: Possible deletion

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:08:30 -0400
Message-Id: <200108170050.UAA5712402@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: "Paul Bohman" <paulb@cpd2.usu.edu>, <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 06:56 PM 2001-08-16 , Paul Bohman wrote:
>[Gregg] Checkpoint 3.3:  Write as clearly and simply as is appropriate for
>the site's content.
>
>[Paul] I think this works well, with one exception: The type of content may
>vary widely on any given site, along with the intended audience. Not every
>piece of content is written for the same audience at the same reading level,
>educational level, etc.
>
>Perhaps we need to drop the word "site's" and just say:
>
>Checkpoint 3.3:  Write as clearly and simply as is appropriate for the
>content.

AG:: Yes, this is simply better.

>P.S. ( I do like the suggestion of simply saying "Write clearly and simply,"
>but this may be too much of a reduction for this draft)

I like that.  But at this point we have a pure principle, and have lost all
pretense of checkability.

It sounds as though in pursuit of this principle we could have three
verifiable
checkpoints:

a) articulate an objective and defensible audience model
b) manage word challenges as guided by this model
c) manage language-structure challenges as guided by this model

Note the audience model does not say who you wish to communicate with and who
you don't wish to communicate with.  It objectifies targets for what reading
level should be able to use the material unassisted and what reading levels
will need the assitance of other aids to use this material.  All materials
should roll over gracefully, that is to say be compatible with the use of
external recognition and comprehension aids for the language employed.

There is still a question as to whether the checkpoints should be at this
level
or should be yet more refined as to 

a.1 facility with vernacular usage in the natural language
a.2 familarity with the specialized usage of specific domains of discourse

b.1 conform to familiar usage -- easy words, used the normal way
b.2 clarify obscure usage -- normal but hard words and naturally occurring
ambiguities
  technique -- include lexicon by title
  technique -- mark
  technique -- link
b.3 define non-standard usage -- Terms of Art and other uglies you _have to_
define.

etc.

Al

>Paul Bohman
>Technology Coordinator
>WebAIM: Web Accessibility in Mind (>www.webaim.org)
>Center for Persons with Disabilities
(<http://www.cpd.usu.edu/>www.cpd.usu.edu)
>Utah State University (<http://www.usu.edu/>www.usu.edu)
>  
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2001 20:50:30 GMT

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