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

Re: Clear and simple writing

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:46:32 -0500 (EST)
To: Jo Miller <jo@bendingline.com>
cc: WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0111270542080.32301-100000@tux.w3.org>
Yes, clearly we are working at the basics here, and there are people who will
know better (and maybe even more who will claim they do). #18 is a success
criterion for #13, which is not measurable although it does seem more useful
to me for that. I suspect that we need to work out some concrete thigns that
we can call success criteria, and then we can work out which are the
important ones...

By the way, I updated the page a bit to explain what it is about (and start
to explain what it isn't...)



On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Jo Miller wrote:

  I'm very happy with #20.

  #2 may be overly restrictive by insisting that the topic sentence
  invariably be the first sentence (I'm not sure this is appropriate
  for all languages). However, I suppose it's probably good to  have a
  firm, clear criterion like this for average and weak writers; the
  good writers who already know how to write clearly (all twelve of
  them) are going to ignore or bend any criteria that don't suit them

  In #18 we may be going overboard in our quest for measurability.
  Sentences can be short and clear while technically containing more
  than one relative clause, and I would rather see this advice in
  Techniques than in a normative document.

  #13 is more useful than #18, though someone might argue that #13 is
  not sufficiently measurable.

  >CMN wrote
  >Although this is a tricky area, and the four of us aren't the world's
  >greatest experst, we came up with some ideas, which I have written up in the
  >following page: http://www.w3.org/2001/11/334-wcag
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2001 05:46:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:39 UTC