- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:37:42 -0700
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
- Cc: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, Loretta Guarino Reid <lguarino@Adobe.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 8:30 PM -0400 2001/8/18, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>Here is something of an alternative approach:
>
>rough proposal:
> Use the simplest, most common language that conveys the meaning required.
>
>I don't think that the word language is good enough here - I mean way of
>expressing something in a given language, rather than switching from english
>to Latin because it provides a simpler construction.
>
>I am also trying to think of a different approach to clarifying the intent of
>the checkpoint and the way we have qualified it. What is important is that
>the text is as "normal" as possible, but that this doesn't actually change
>the message that is being expressed.
Well, we really mean,
Write simply enough to be understood.
Let's be careful about getting too far away from remembering what we're
trying to say, while trying to figure out how to say it.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network
Tel +1 949-567-7006
________________________________________
BUSINESS IS DYNAMIC. TAKE CONTROL.
________________________________________
http://www.reef.com
Received on Saturday, 18 August 2001 22:00:15 UTC