W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division

From: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo <emmanuelle@mi.madritel.es>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 17:11:15 +0200
Message-ID: <00f701c249ee$292945d0$4e4225d5@emmanuelle1>
To: "john_slatin" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>, "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, "WAI GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

I agree totally with Charles and Johh,

Maybe the following article can help to edit some more appropriate
approaches:
http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/Rapport/rap19.html#FIVE

regards,

Emmanuelle

----- Original Message -----
From: "john_slatin" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>
To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>; "WAI GL"
<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 4:25 PM
Subject: RE: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division


|
| Charles makes an excellent point.  Perhaps the advice section for 4.1
could
| include something to the effect that authors should follow the conventions
| appropriate to the natural language of the content.  A further point: even
| in English, it's not always appropriate to avoid the passive.  There are
| times when it isn't possible to assign grammatical agency-- especially in
| bureaucratic writing.  The Section 508 standards would fail this criterion
| if we were to insist on it, for example.
|
| There are implicit cultural assumptions here, too.  In the United States,
| for example, many people place high value on coming directly to "the
point,"
| both in writing and in oral communication.  But in many countries such
| directness is considered rude, and in some cases it may be politically
| dangerous (which is why satire flourishes under repressive regimes).
|
| John
|
| John Slatin, Ph.D.
| Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
| University of Texas at Austin
| FAC 248C, Mail code G9600
| Austin, TX 78712
| ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
| email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
| web http://www.ital.utexas.edu
|
|
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
| Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 9:05 am
| To: WAI GL
| Subject: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division
|
|
|
| Hi,
|
| I think it is important that any success criteria for language use
includes
| a list of applicable languages.
|
| For example, there is a proposal not to use noun sequences. In french, one
| can reasonably say
|
|   la version du loi de droits de general de gaulle
|
| (either: General de Gaulle's version of the law of rights, or the version
of
| the law of General de Gaulle's rights).
|
| Similarly, it is proposed that verbs in the passive mood be avoided. (I.e.
| the last sentence would fail, twice). I don't know if this applies in all
| languages.
|
| If we do not think that a criterion works for a particular language, we
| should not say anything. If we think that a criterion does not work for a
| particular language, we should say so. I realise that this will leave us
| with a weaker list than we might have, but hopefully it will encourage
| people with relevant expertise to help fill the list. It will also
hopefully
| mean we avoid saying things that are wrong and would cause problems.
|
| cheers
|
| chaals
|
| --
| Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134
| 136 SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI
| http://www.w3.org/WAI  21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
| fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22  W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia
| Antipolis Cedex, France
|
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2002 11:16:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:19 GMT